Clinton back up over 70% chance to secure nomination as Biden falls back

[Godhumor]

From predictive market aggregator:
http://www.predictwise.com

Chance at nomination:
Clinton - 71%
Biden - 16%
Sanders - 12%

Party to win the White House:
Democratic - 59%
Republican - 41%

Next President:
Clinton - 43%
Bush - 13%
Biden - 11%
Rubio - 10%
Trump - 7%
Sanders - 6%

Quite the logjam behind Clinton.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

1. I think she got a bump from the McCarthy revelation that all the investigations are partisan.

What an awesome gift...

It's the proverbial "get out of jail free" card....


I think everybody who pooh poohed her assertions about conspiracies owes her an apology.

[Number23]

22. I was wondering if anyone in this forum had seen that for felt it worthy of discussion

A top House Republican was accidentally honest about the Benghazi investigation
http://www.vox.com/2015/9/30/9423339/kevin-mccarthy-benghazi

What you’re going to see is a conservative speaker, that takes a conservative Congress, that puts a strategy to fight and win. And let me give you one example. Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right?

But we put together a Benghazi special committee. A select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she’s untrustable. But no one would have known that any of that had happened had we not fought to make that happen.

That's about as blatant as you can get. And it is nothing but a declaration that they see Hillary as a genuine threat that must be eliminated.

[Hortensis]

30. Most people are paying little to no attention, though. Remember that big block of

network news viewers who average about 3 minutes a day?

[enid602]

33. poor

Poor English as well. ' Untrustable.'

[Gothmog]

2. This number will increase yet more when Biden formally drops out

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. Kevin McCarthy screwed the pooch

eom

[ronnykmarshall]

29. I am loving it ....

The first thing out of mom's mouth (she lives in Bakersfield) when I called her was: Well Kevin McCarthy has sure shit in his mess kit!. My step dad is having cocktails in heaven with brother laughing their asses off about that jerk.

[riversedge]

4. As I said earlier when McCarthy spilled the milk-it is a good day for

Hillary. oh---also Wendy Davis said to endorse her. Yes. V. good day.

[Fearless]

5. Would be a good way to make money off of her loss

[Control-Z]

11. What does that even mean? n/t

[Fearless]

21. If she's seen as the odds on favorite

Place a bet in Vegas against her. She will lose. Even if the odds don't show it yet. Might as well make some money on a sure thing.

[Control-Z]

23. I'm sorry I wasted the time of day

responding to your post. Yuk.

[Fearless]

25. Uh oh, not bitter resentment!

What issue(s) do you agree with Hillary on that oppose views Bernie has?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

26. I will take the bet. I will set up a paypal account and verify it.

eom

[Fearless]

28. I said Vegas.

If Vegas wants to give those odds, then I say call them on it.

I don't give those odds.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

31. You can't bet on political races at Vegas. It's against the law.

You have to go to the off shore books:



http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2016/democrat-candidate

[Fearless]

32. Great. My point still stands. Excuse me for mistaking off shore betting with Vegas. Wow.

[DanTex]

6. K&R. Also, the implied electability probabilities at this moment are:

Clinton = 43/71 = 61%
Biden = 11/16 = 79%
Sanders = 6/13 = 46%

Bush = 13/32 = 41%
Rubio = 10/28 = 36%
Trump = 7/11 = 64%

So, according to these odds, the best matchup for Dems is Biden/Rubio, and the worst is Sanders/Trump.

[stonecutter357]

7. K&R!

[ram2008]

8. IDK why people take stock in prediction markets

Clinton was up 70-30% to Obama on caucus night from what I remember.

Also, this prediction market gives Jeb Bush a 32% chance of being the nominee for the Repubs; he pretty much has zero %chance of getting the nod with his favorability numbers and the mood of the party. All these numbers tell us is how bad betters are at predicting the way elections will go.

[DanTex]

9. Because they are one of if not the most accurate way to assess probabilities of events.

There are pundits and opinions and so on, but markets are based on people willing to risk money. And if people think they are wrong, instead of yelling at the TV, they can make profit from it.

[reformist2]

10. But the stock market is wildly unpredictable. Dow Jones is 14,000 one moment, 6,000 the next.

[DanTex]

13. Unpredictable, yes, in fact, that's the point. The best guess for what tomorrow's S&P value will be

is todays S&P value. And the same goes for next month, or next year (taking into account interest rates, but in essence).

Prediction markets are basically the same. The number might go up, and it might go down, but the chances of either are the same. And in the end, the number ends at either 100% or 0%. Which means that Hillary, currently at 70%, has a 70% chance at ending at 100% (i.e. winning) and a 30% chance of ending at 0%.

[reformist2]

16. But she doesn't really have a 70% chance of winning. People think she does now, which is meaningless

The stock market proves my point. The Dow would never have reached 14,000 in late 2007, if people knew the stock market would be cut in half only twelve months later in late 2008.

Most predictions far off into the future are bunk.

[DanTex]

17. Yes she does. Sure, markets move around, but nobody knows which direction.

In 2007 the Dow was at 14K. Then it went down to under 7. Then back up to 14. Then up to over 18. Now around 16.

Nobody knows which way it's going to go. Same with Hillary's odds. In a month it could be 80 or 60. In fact, those are equally likely. The thing is, since it's at 70 now, it's more likely to crawl up to 100 than to crawl down to 0.

[reformist2]

18. She does not have a 70% chance of winning. Truth vs Opinion. Big difference.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

27. You are correct...Her chances of winning are higher, and again I am willing to wager on it./nt

[ram2008]

12. They are based entirely on the media narrative

People bet their money based on their reading of the current media narrative. None of the betting markets predicted Obama winning the Dem nod until after he won Iowa and NH.

[DanTex]

14. No, they are based on what people are willing to bet on. People can base their bets on whatever

they want. If the prediction markets had Obama at 30% early on, that doesn't mean he's definitely going to lose, it means that he's going to lose 70% of the time. 3 out of 10 times, he wins. One of those three came up in 2008.

[ram2008]

19. What people are willing to bet on is sometimes contrary to what is most likely going to happen

Case in point: Jeb Bush at 32% chance of being the nominee is laughable.

[DanTex]

20. The good thing is, that presents profit opportunities for people who think the markets are wrong.

And when people think the markets are wrong, the markets adjust. If you think 32% for Jeb is laughable, I suggest opening an account and putting some money on it.

[ram2008]

24. I would do that

But from I remember it is illegal to do in the United States and thats why InTrade got shut down back in 2012.

[workinclasszero]

15. Nice that the teahaddists admitted

all their BS investigations are just to stop Hillary from gaining the presidency.

Laws must have been broken, when are the republicans responsible going to jail?