US Politics

What am I missing here? Aren't those odds basically the same?

Exactly like the polls are all basically the same.

A few % or decimal points translates into a dead heat, not OMG Harris is definitely going to win because she is a fraction ahead right now.

The odds given are not 50:50

https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/en/politics/usa-presidential-election-2024/election-winner-betting-1.178176964

I think Trump is inexorably edging ahead by amping up the lies and insults, which gets him ever more headlines. His detractors help him by attacking him every day. Kamala is trailing because everything is about Trump, including her own campaign. Nobody knows what she offers, apart from not being Trump. Trump will win just by being brazen and ruthless.

Have there been any studies in whether betting odds are better predictors of election outcomes? Someone must have looked into it already but I didn't spot anything with a quick google

Well my quick maths is clearly shit, because I worked that out as being closer than the implied odds Google gives me of 63.6% vs 40%.

But my point wasn't about them being 50:50 but being close enough not to indicate anything other than it being close.

Nobody knows what she offers, apart from not being Trump.

In a sane world, that would be more than enough

This is the ludicrous dichotomy of running against Trump, though isn't it?

You can't discuss policy because he doesn't have any because he gets a pass, whole you get called out for not discussing policy, because you don't.

It's absolutely fucking ridiculous that he's even in the running.

I'm starting to get the fear

6/4 is pretty long for a very close two horse race.

I am not a betting expert, but I don't think bookmaker odds for a long-running contest (esp with only 2 options) tell you that much in isolation - as they may be significantly weighted in order to reverse the pattern of earlier betting, so risk of bookmaker loss is minimised. They should not be read as probabilities.

(edit: I guess people did say this before, but still.

However a graph of average odds over time is more interesting e.g: https://www.realclearpolling.com/betting-odds/2024/president
)

Yep, definitely. It receded briefly for a few weeks when Harris was nominated, but it's coming back strongly now.

Totally. It's on a knife edge and it feels like the World is in a very dark place and Trump winning would be very on brand right now 😑

This is a good listen/read https://freakonomics.com/podcast/how-to-predict-the-presidency/

I keep having daddy Indiana Jones' armies of darkness speach going round my head.

Trump has overtaken Harris on a poll about the economy. The FT says this is big. https://www.ft.com/content/a85d86c2-e299-42a5-9f75-9f1f8f2ee4cc

One French person has bet $28m on Trump to win https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/24/business/dealbook/polymarket-trump-trader.html

Musk is gaming the Polymarket thing openly though, so I'd ignore that.

The FT article is going to be more genuine I would think.

I thought trump lead on the economy in most polls, most of the time(?)

Trump to go on Rogan.

I'd imagine this is only slightly different to him going on Alex Jones. the intersection between Rogan fans and conspiracy theorists/covid deniers/masculinity grifters is a pretty big one. Most of them are probably already Trumpists

He's got a surprisingly broad spread of audience politics wise. Just mostly male and young. Plus it's all about the clips and meta serves those to everyone

It reminds me of hearing someone once say Silicon Valley is an experiment in capitalism with infinite capital.

It's nuts that one person has that much money to throw a round

This is a large part of his strategy though, he goes hard on the podcasts as he engages a demographic that wouldn't normally turn out and it's a large enough demographic to tilt the scales in his favour

I'm also surprised Rogan is having him on as he has said several times he's been hounded by the Trump team for years to have him on and wasn't willing to as he knew it would be putting his thumb on the scale and he wasn't willing to do that knowing the reach his show has. He has also said he knew it wouldn't be a genuine conversation as you just get bogged down in the grift and performance. So I wonder what changed, I can't imagine Harris on.

Bernie has been on a few rogansphere podcasts lately, Theo Von, Lex Friedman and does such a good job of disarming thier arguements and advocating for progressive policies in a reasonable manor.

A counterbalance to the depressing poll numbers coming out currently: https://bad-faith-times.ghost.io/you-are-being-manipulated-by-bad-faith-pollsters/