Prediction Markets and the 2008 Electoral Map 813
Electionwatch submitted a predicted electoral map of the 2008 US Presidential election, based on the bets made by the intrade prediction markets. I'm always interested in these markets and how accurate they end up being. This one calls it for Obama, but then again you probably could guess that by just watching 10 minutes of any TV "News" channel.
I, for one, welcome our new Votemaster! (Score:5, Informative)
Iowa State has a good election market too (Score:3, Informative)
You can see it here. [uiowa.edu] . they have 2 differenent election markets.. one is winer take all and the other is vote percentage..
Re:Called if for Obama (Score:5, Informative)
Not to take any of the blame from the Repubs but I think it's safe to include the Dems in there as well. Any ounce of thoughtful prevention from anyone has been quickly buried by both.
Score one for the politicians, I'm surprised that no one has realized that there really is only one party with two different subsets in America.
Re:I, for one, welcome our new Votemaster! (Score:5, Informative)
Right before the 2004 election, electoral-vote.com called the election for Kerry. Oops!
I appreciate his sentiments and his methodology but it seems he doesn't have a great track record for picking winners
Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Dolt (Score:2, Informative)
According to what source? A free market doesn't just collapse and die. The only portions that collapse are the corrupt portions (where information is purposely being distorted, withheld, or otherwise not properly being dispersed). The rest will function fine, and the portions that collapse will immediately start being rebuilt.
Re:Best election site (Score:1, Informative)
So I was eager to start on this new hobby... but then I googled a bit and saw that someone has already implemented most of my ideas at fivethirtyeight.com [fivethirtyeight.com]. Drat. Anyway, that site is actually pretty good.
The important statistic there is the "win percentage". It is a likelihood estimate of a candidate's victory. So if we go only by polling data, then we'd predict Obama to win 52.6% of the time. This is so close to 50% because there are a lot of states which, based on polls, could break either way, even if they are not split 50/50. For example, recent polls give Obama a pretty consistent lead over McCain in Pennsylvania of about 5 to 8 points, but the error in polling is uncertain enough that the odds for Obama's victory in PA are still only about 2:1. If either candidate were to be assured of victory in the general election, we'd need to see quite a lot of movement in the polls.
I can still think of some improvements I'd make to fivethirtyeight.com if it were my work. Mostly I'd want to estimate the model-dependent systematic error by running the election simulation with a few different algorithms, and by running it several times discarding a single polling group each other. (i.e., run the analysis without Rasmussen, run it without SurveyUSA, etc.)
Re:Called if for Obama (Score:2, Informative)
Re:No, You. (Score:3, Informative)
All it really does is spread out the dose so they don't get it all in one shot.
Well, the dog chewed this plastic tube, and I had to get a replacement. Now, keep in mind, this is not the medicine, it's just a plastic tube... the U.S. government has decided to regulate it, so you can't get it OTC. Around the world you can get one of these for $20; in the U.S. it's $65 and you need a prescription in order to get it. So here it was, late at night, I was unable to get a prescription, and after that hassle it cost more than three times the going rate... for a plastic tube.
This is a clear cut case of government interference INCREASING the cost of simple treatments; say what you will about insurance companies, but please don't give the government impunity... when the free market reigned, healthcare was actually affordable. Things have have changed, medicine has advanced, things have become more complex and expensive... but we're paying too much AT LEAST in part from government interference.
Re:Iowa State has a good election market too (Score:1, Informative)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Called if for Obama (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Called if for Obama (Score:3, Informative)
2. He's okay with civil unions.
3. He's against constitutional amendments outlawing gay marriage.
These are similar to, but still more permitting, than McCain's views. Please do a better job at reviewing the candidate positions.
Re:Dolt (Score:3, Informative)
Libertarians in no way forget the value that society has contributed to their own success, and they absolutely believe in providing benefit to society. They just don't recognize government as the agency that should be allowed to determine how those societal benefits are distributed.
Re:Why McCain? (Score:2, Informative)
Not necessarily. It depends on where you are on the unfortunately-named Laffer curve. If every one is taxed at 100%, no one would work, so there would be no tax revenue. With a tax rate of zero, there is also no tax revenue. Somewhere in between is a point where the tax revenue is maximized. If your tax rate is above that point, increasing it has the effect of reducing tax revenue.
Re:I, for one, welcome our new Votemaster! (Score:3, Informative)
nope. Here's the page from the day of the election:
http://electoral-vote.com/evp2004/nov/nov02.html [electoral-vote.com]
He gives Kerry 262 electoral votes. Since you need 270 to win, you can't really say he called it for Kerry.
Re:Why McCain? (Score:2, Informative)
Scandinavia is a good example that socialism works without removing individual rights, possibilities or the right to choose which services to use.
For example, is there a better way to provide equal possibilities to everyone than free education (including higher education)? The socialist system is aimed to provide equal standing point for everyone, despite their origins or wealth.