Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Politics Government

Political Stock Market Simulation 41

Posted by michael from the hedging-your-bets dept.
Elphaba Thropp writes "Zack Coburn (of ArsDigita fame) recently released Politics on ZackCoburn.com, a political stock market simulation in which 'political figures are the symbols. The price of each symbol will fluctuate as users rate it either positively or negatively.' Each user starts with $1,000,000, and can rate a symbol's performance every twenty-four hours. The site also offers user blogs, and contains a unique statistics page, in which the top users and symbols are shown, as well as the most liberally-owned and most conservatively-owned stocks are shown (based on a political survey each user can take). Interestingly enough, George W. Bush currently has the most liberal ownership."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Political Stock Market Simulation More

Political Stock Market Simulation

Comments Filter:

  • Wow. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Sheetrock ( 152993 ) on Tuesday September 07, 2004 @06:35PM (#10183825) Homepage Journal
    Remember when politics was about trying to figure out the best guy for the job?

    We've sure gotten away from that. The whole Swift Boat thing has made a great distraction from any meaningful issues that could be raised. And now a 'political stock market simulation'?

    What's wrong with politics that we do everything we can to stop from looking at it objectively? Why make it a game?

    • I agree with your message, but I do not agree with your sig. I was going to mod, but I decided to reply.

      You are absolutely right that politics is, for the most part, not about real issues. Things like SBVFT and Bush's (non-existant) Alabama National Guard record are supposedly character issues. But they're from 30-40 years ago. Why is the validity of Kerry's purple hearts an issue, but the fact that Bush was on coke as recently as 1991 (See Kitty Kelley's new book) not an issue?

      Kerry is trying as hard as
      • First, the fact that you thought about moding a person down because you do not agree with them shows why the political section of /. will be a major fuckup.

        Second, why doesn't kerry run on his senate record? Could it be that he hasn't done much in the 16+ years he has been in DC?

        Lastly, both major sides do not want to talk about the issues because both have a public record of what they have done, and it ain't much.

        • I think you misread the grandparent. My impression was that he was about to mod the great grandparent up, but then saw the sig. He decided to respond instead of mod because he thought that the sig meritted a dialog. Obviously, the original poster had been up modded now anyhow.

          • I don't. The /. moderation system has turned into a weapon that is used against people one the basis of who they are and what they think. It isn't being used for the purposes that it is intended.

            If it was I would not be mod bombed when I post unpopular ideas as I do not think it is a coincidence that multi posts of mine, on totally different topics, get modded down with in minutes of each other.

          • You are correct, DAldredge is mistaken. I was gonna mod him up, but I decided to discuss instead. Stop the hate, child!
        • Actually, I was going to mod him up, but decided to discuss instead. I don't really have time to get into Kerry's senate record, but here's a good article:

          http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/08/10/ker ry _record/index_np.html
    • Well, if you listen to some of the DEMS, even bring up Kerrys senate record isn't right. Hell, what has he done in the Senate?
    • OK, so how do I go about shorting this political stock so I can make a killing when one of the candidates crashes and burns... oh never mind.

    • What's wrong with politics that we do everything we can to stop from looking at it objectively?

      Politics is inherently subjective; you're choosing someone to govern, to give authority over yourself to some degree. Like any human relationship, you'll need to establish trust with that person before you choose them.

      And the candidate will do everything to convince as many as possible that such trust is well placed.

      Unfortunately, well-developed deception skills can sell "I'm trustworthy" to many people.

      Big

  • Why is Kerry trading at 3x Bush's value? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Marxist Hacker 42 ( 638312 ) * <seebert42@gmail.com> on Tuesday September 07, 2004 @06:41PM (#10183891) Homepage Journal
    And what is that supposed to mean in comparison to actual votes at the end of the race?

  • no real moey behind this! (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This is absurd. To expect simulation participants to put any effort into it without trying to game the system is ridiculous unless there's real money in it, like London bookmaker's odds or the Iowa Futures Markets.

  • Huh (Score:4, Informative)

    by c0dedude ( 587568 ) on Tuesday September 07, 2004 @06:43PM (#10183914)
    Why play for fake money when you can play for the real thing? Check this out. [uiowa.edu]
    Disclamer: Not associated with this site, just remember it from a /. story.
    • Why? Because it's real money! Spend that on a couple shares of Google instead.

      • Re:Huh (Score:2, Interesting)

        by SeniorDingDong ( 111782 )
        I recall an interview of somone that had been polled 6 times and said he had intentionally misled the pollsters so as to throw off those changing their politics based on those polls. With this in mind, I can think of a few things that would make such a device a better predictor. First, it's voluntary. Second, if one is playing with their own money, there's a real incentive to contribute honestly. Third, as there must surely be a continum of reasoning behind one's vote, a poll could tend to oversimplify

  • Bush's liberal ownership (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Malfourmed ( 633699 ) on Tuesday September 07, 2004 @06:44PM (#10183929) Homepage
    Interestingly enough, George W. Bush currently has the most liberal ownership.

    Maybe they're trying to short the stock?

    • Re:Bush's liberal ownership (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Eh?

      Shorting the stock means to borrow it and then sell it, hoping to buy it back at a lower price.

      I don't think they are shorting it, just betting that he is going to win (I would bet on that myself. The polls show Bush in the lead right now).
      • Shorting the stock means to borrow it and then sell it, hoping to buy it back at a lower price.

        Yeah - I was hoping the comment would be funny even with the inaccuracy. Going by the moderation I was wrong. :(
  • Interestingly enough, George W. Bush currently has the most liberal ownership.

    Well as a democrat, I would love to see George Bush lose. As a rational person I know he will probably ending winning, due to big business, or the senior vote which usually goes overwhelmingly to republicans. Combined with the fact that Kerry's war record is in doubt, and how Nader is gaining more votes. I really dont want bush to be president and I will vote against him, but I would also put my money on Bush
    • Nader is amazingly awesome. What I hate about Bush, I like about Nader. What I dislike about Nader, I like about Bush. All in all, Nader >> all 3.

    • Re:liberal stock (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Dan Grossman ( 689470 )
      I don't think Bush has won yet. Kerry has gotten some good advice from the new campaign team and Clinton, and they're all telling him to ramp it up and start talking about the domestic issues instead of Vietnam. His latest website entries and commercials are about domestic issues instead of the war, so if he can ramp it up, he has a chance of coming back. I think the debates will help as well. Bush really didn't live up to the promises he made 4 years ago for economy, employment, healthcare, or education.
      • Clintons team, isn't this the same team that 'helped' gore so much? Hell, the best thing that could happen to H Clinton is for Kerry to lose so she can run in 2008.

  • And Democrats opposed the repealing of the dividend tax.

    I'm sure they're pleased with freedom to trade in this market...

  • Bad Design (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    The users vote to upgrade or downgrade their own stocks, without needing to cite any events to explain their decision. IOW, people buy a load of stock and vote its price up based on their partisan opinion and the fact it'll give them a higher score, then vote down the price of what they didn't buy. Hmm.. maybe that does correspond to politics somewhat.

    Also, there appears to be an infinite surplus of stock, so there are no market effects in this stock market.

    Hot tip: Afghan elections to be held next early
  • Where is the Michael Badnarik [badnarik.org] symbol. Ironic to have a market without a Libertarian, non?

    Yours truly,
    Mr. X

    ...curious...

Slashdot Top Deals

"Conversion, fastidious Goddess, loves blood better than brick, and feasts most subtly on the human will." -- Virginia Woolf, "Mrs. Dalloway"

Close