2024 U.S. Elections | Thread Closed

Status
Not open for further replies.
There's going to be alot of eggs on faces if Trump wins, 95% of the media are reporting a Harris win with all their data they have, how could they get it so wrong if Trumpo wins?
Because polling data =/= election data? You’re talking hundreds or thousands of data points collected by various mediums used to extrapolate what 140,000,000 odd voters will do.

The data is unreliable because it’s almost impossible to get a small snapshot of the actual electorate so data scientists try to apply their own models to clean it up and figure out where the bias is and remove it. At that point it’s just reading tea leaves.
 
There's going to be alot of eggs on faces if Trump wins, 95% of the media are reporting a Harris win with all their data they have, how could they get it so wrong if Trumpo wins?
Any examples of the 95%? Looking some optimism
 
There's going to be alot of eggs on faces if Trump wins, 95% of the media are reporting a Harris win with all their data they have, how could they get it so wrong if Trumpo wins?
Really? Can you name all of this media reporting Harris wins? Haven’t seen any myself apart from some questionable polling social media with room for error. Lots for Trump as well.
 
There's going to be alot of eggs on faces if Trump wins, 95% of the media are reporting a Harris win with all their data they have, how could they get it so wrong if Trumpo wins?
Go grab 20 relevant pages then, 19 saying "Harris wins" and one saying "I don't know".
 
You can’t extract anything of value about winning probability out of that is his point. As a data point, Polymarket is near worthless, at least bettors on capped platforms like PredictIt can’t manipulate the odds so they are more rational about their wager, although still vulnerable to ‘vibes’ to some degrees, think it went to 56-44 for Trump when polling consistently showed a deadheat.

you can infer that's what he meant to make it less wrong, but the poster actually said it means "feckall"

And I disagree anyway, any market that has $2bn in volume is worthwhile data. Even if you have to do a bit of math to estimate the real significance. That's what professional gamblers and traders do for a living, take incomplete information and use it to model an advantage in the markets.
 
Any examples of the 95%? Looking some optimism

Literally everywhere you see that's predicting the end result, someone posted a tweet that had 6 polls and only one predicted a Trump win and that was probably a righty leaning poll as it is, I might be wrong and just ingested a bunch of biased data myself but it doesn't look like a Trump win, though I guess 2016 was abit like that (for Clinton) but on the day itself I vaguely remember everyone predicting Trump (whereas leading up it was Clinton)
 
I thought Biden got five votes in 2020, Trump none. It says so here
That’s correct. The caveat is 3 people moved in and 3 people moved out, so they aren’t the same group of people in 2020.

It’s just a fun little tradition. Obama was 5-5 with Romney in 2012, Clinton was 4-2 with Trump in 2016. Doesn’t mean anything.
 
There's going to be alot of eggs on faces if Trump wins, 95% of the media are reporting a Harris win with all their data they have, how could they get it so wrong if Trumpo wins?
What media is this? I feel like most of the projections the last few weeks have been favouring the Donald
 
you can infer that's what he meant to make it less wrong, but the poster actually said it means "feckall"

And I disagree anyway, any market that has $2bn in volume is worthwhile data. Even if you have to do a bit of math to estimate the real significance. That's what professional gamblers and traders do for a living, take incomplete information and use it to model an advantage in the markets.
$2B of non-American bets, that's worthwhile data?
 
A guy I know just tried to tell me she's "totally unqualified to be President".

She's the first US candidate in history to have worked in all 3 branches of government and she's running against a guy who never worked in government, yet formerly sane and rational people have allowed themselves be convinced that it's the reality TV grifter who is more qualified. I remember someone telling me how you just naturally end up with less friends as you get older and I'm beginning to understand why.
 
That’s correct. The caveat is 3 people moved in and 3 people moved out, so they aren’t the same group of people in 2020.

It’s just a fun little tradition. Obama was 5-5 with Romney in 2012, Clinton was 4-2 with Trump in 2016. Doesn’t mean anything.
I know I know. Totally arbitrary .

I mean
4 republicans and 2 undeclared and she still tied it

LANDSLIDE COMING
 
Whoever the feck thought it would be a good idea to let people bet on elections should be flogged.

“But the betting markets…” is right up there with kids saying the phrases “crash out” and “skibbidy” in annoyance for me

It started in 1988 with the Iowa election futures market and I'd argue in the first 20 years it worked as intended but the iterations now are removed from the way IEM used to work in several important ways and clearly open to manipulation by super rich actors.

Scientific American 2008 said:
In late March 1988 three economists from the University of Iowa were nursing beers at a local hangout in Iowa City, when conversation turned to the news of the day. Jesse Jackson had captured 55 percent of the votes in the Michigan Democratic caucuses, an outcome that the polls had failed to intimate. The ensuing grumbling about the unreliability of polls sparked the germ of an idea. At the time, experimental economics—in which economic theory is tested by observing the behavior of groups, usually in a classroom setting—had just come into vogue, which prompted the three drinking partners to deliberate about whether a market might do better than the polls.

A market in political candidates would serve as a novel way to test an economic theory asserting that all information about a security is reflected in its price. For a stock or other financial security, the price summarizes, among other things, what traders know about the factors influencing whether a company will achieve its profit goals in the coming quarter or whether sales may plummet. Instead of recruiting students to imitate “buyers” or “sellers” of goods and services, as in other economics experiments, participants in this election market would trade contracts that would provide payoffs depending on what percentage of the vote George H. W. Bush, Michael Dukakis or other candidates received.

If the efficient-market hypothesis, as the theory relating to securities is known, applied to contracts on political candidates as well as shares of General Electric, it might serve as a tool for discerning who was leading or trailing during a political campaign. Maybe an election market could have foretold Jackson’s win. Those beer-fueled musings appear to have produced one of the most notable successes in experimental economics—and have blossomed into a subdiscipline devoted to studying prediction markets that allow investing or betting (pick the term you like best) not just on elections but on the future of climate change, movie box-office receipts and the next U.S. military incursion.
https://mason.gmu.edu/~rhanson/PAM/PRESS/ScientificAmerican-3-08.pdf
 
A guy I know just tried to tell me she's "totally unqualified to be President".

She's the first US candidate in history to have worked in all 3 branches of government and she's running against a guy who never worked in government, yet formerly sane and rational people have allowed themselves be convinced that it's the reality TV grifter who is more qualified. I remember someone telling me how you just naturally end up with less friends as you get older and I'm beginning to understand why.
There is really no point in talking/arguing with his supporters, at least from my experience. They make absolutely no sense whatsoever so I let them be and exercise their right to vote for whoever they want.
 
you can infer that's what he meant to make it less wrong, but the poster actually said it means "feckall"

And I disagree anyway, any market that has $2bn in volume is worthwhile data. Even if you have to do a bit of math to estimate the real significance. That's what professional gamblers and traders do for a living, take incomplete information and use it to model an advantage in the markets.

"The poster", meaning @SirAF, meant it means feck all in terms of predicting the winner. Which is the case. That is obviously what we're talking about here.
 
The ridiculous thing is I can honestly see him running in 2028, at 83.

Definitely cannot rule it out.

I think ultimately it will be a step too far even for him, but i wouldn't rule it out. It's a cult and he's the leader of the cult, until he's dead he will cling to power in that party.
 
Definitely cannot rule it out.

I think ultimately it will be a step too far even for him, but i wouldn't rule it out. It's a cult and he's the leader of the cult, until he's dead he will cling to power in that party.
His maga goons might run and he might endorse them but he ain’t running at 82. Even more cognitive decline if that is possible and he already seems tired and low energy. He cannot make another campaign run.
 
$2B of non-American bets, that's worthwhile data?

lots (possibly most) of the volume is from the USA, they target the US with their ad campaigns

no KYC so just a VPN and crypto wallet to bet, which everyone is crypto has anyway, so it couldn't be easier

UK is "blocked" too but I used it all the time
 
His maga goons might run and he might endorse them but he ain’t running at 82. Even more cognitive decline if that is possible and he already seems tired and low energy. He cannot make another campaign run.

Logic doesn't apply to Trump though. Of course he shouldn't be running when he's 82, he shouldn't be running now but he is.

My prediction would be he tries to run again but the GOP talk him out of it and go with someone else, Nikki Haley maybe.
 
"The poster", meaning @SirAF, meant it means feck all in terms of predicting the winner. Which is the case. That is obviously what we're talking about here.

that's not correct though

$2bn in betting volume is significant I'm not even sure how it's possible to argue otherwise

that's a huge amount of data to compare to the last election
 
lots (possibly most) of the volume is from the USA, they target the US with their ad campaigns

no KYC so just a VPN and crypto wallet to bet, which everyone is crypto has anyway, so it couldn't be easier

UK is "blocked" too but I used it all the time
Any hard data on the makeup of the bettors?
 
that's not correct though

$2bn in betting volume is significant I'm not even sure how it's possible to argue otherwise

that's a huge amount of data to compare to the last election

How is it significant in terms of predicting the winner when a bunch of foreign "whales" are betting big on Trump which makes the market move? They do not have any more perfect information than you and I do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.