Obama Has a 50% Chance of Winning the WH; McCain 34%; Clinton 17%

[Stephanie]

I like them odds.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/02/15/2008-02-15_web_gamblers_betting_on_barack_obama.html

Web gamblers betting on Barack Obama
BY HELEN KENNEDY
Friday, February 15th 2008, 4:00 AM

If you needed one more sign that Barack Obama is on a roll, the futures trading markets have decided he's a very good bet.

According to several overseas online exchanges, Obama is now a virtual lock to win all the upcoming primaries, including Texas and Ohio — the states Hillary Clinton is pinning her hopes on.

And he's the even-money favorite to be elected President in November.

"Obama has all the momentum, and the betting odds reflect that," said Steve Budin, an oddsmaker at sportsinfo.com who puts Obama's likelihood of being President at 4-5, with Clinton and John McCain both at 3-2.

***

Betting on politics is a new multimillion-dollar Internet industry — it's a high-tech revival of an American fad that was big in the 1800s — and some experts regard traders as better fortune-tellers than pollsters.

"There are many ways of forecasting elections: polls, talking heads on TV, what have you. In all of the head-to-head comparisons, predictions markets have yielded better answers," said Wharton School Prof. Justin Wolfers.

***

The Iowa Electronic Markets flipped after Super Tuesday, when Obama won more states than Clinton. It now gives him a 70% shot at the nomination, while Intrade.com pegs his likelihood at 75%.

Obama stands a 50-50 chance of winning the White House, according to line-setters. GOPer John McCain has a 34% shot, and Clinton is looking at a 17% chance.

http: //news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slideshow/photo//080214/ids_photos_ts/r611580072.jpg/

[Ravy]

1. Cool. An even 121% chance that one of them will make it. nt

[Stephanie]

6. fixed, thank you

:hi:

[jlake]

2. The part of the article where you got the figures for Hill & McCain gives Obama 50%

....that will make your numbers add up to 100% rather than 121%.

[Stephanie]

4. Thanks

Can you tell I'm not a gambler? I might place a bet anyway. :hi:

[tridim]

3. Great news, but I don't know why anyone would place bets on an election..

counted by Diebold machines.

[superkia]

19. First thing that I thought of when I read the post. When the system...

is corrupted, gambling would only be a good idea if you are one on the side that is doing the fixing.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

5. By The Way.... 50/50 Means 50%.

[Blue-Jay]

17. Thanks, professor.

:dunce:

[BlueManDude]

7. these idots are no more accurate betting on politics than they are on sports

this is meaningless horseshit. these jokers were all betting on obama to cream hrc in nh - whoops. 6 weeks ago you could have gotten mccain at something like 300-1.

they are followers just like everyone else.

hrc is still a good bet to win the nomination (she has zero chance of winning the presidency unless there's a rw 3rd party)- if you're the betting type she's worth a look to win the dem nom.

[Independent-Voter]

9. I cashed out my InTrade account made several months ago

Put my money where my mouth is, and put a fair amount (>1K, but <10K) on Obama. With Hillary's absolute circus of a campaign and subsequent tanking, I tripled my money in short order. Donated half to my favorite charity, threw some at Obaba, and am holding the rest for the GE. I'll have a few dollars left to play with thanks to HRC's utter incompetence.

In short, people putting money down on elections generally don't bullshit around. Put up or shut up.

[oasis]

8. Hillary's numbers will skyrocket after Obama is out of the picture. You can bet on it.

;-)

[Stephanie]

10. um, ohhhkayyyy

[Occam Bandage]

15. I'd say she's the odds-on favorite for 2016, yes.

[oasis]

25. Just so "Mr. Hope" doesn't make another try in 2012 after McCain wipes the floor with him

in November.

If Hillary can hold back her disgust for the fickledloons of the Democratic Party, she may decide to run again.

[Major Hogwash]

11. But, which Clinton? And is Bill Bennett covering all of his bets by betting on everyone?

One to win, one to place, and one to show.

LoL

[mtnsnake]

12. Geniuses from all over the country said that Hillary would never win a first term as US Senator, too

She proves them wrong all the time by going out and DOING, as opposed to DREAMING.

[Stephanie]

14. They didn't think she could be Giuliani, and she might not have

Giuliani dropped out and the best the GOP could come up with was Rick Lazio, who was a disaster for them.

[mtnsnake]

She would've creamed Gullini. You know it, Gulaini knew it, everyone knew it

[Stephanie]

18. The facts say otherwise.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1318.xml?ReleaseID=600

February 6, 2000 - Clinton-Giuliani Senate Race Is Too Close To Call, Quinnipiac College Poll Finds; But Voters 50 - 31 Expect Him To Win In November

New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani clings to a narrow 45 - 42 percent lead over First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton in their too-close-to-call race for the U.S. Senate, according to a Quinnipiac College poll released today. Ten percent are undecided.

By a wider 50 - 31 percent margin, New York State registered voters expect Giuliani to win in November. Among Clinton voters, 19 percent expect Giuliani to win. Among Giuliani voters, 6 percent expect Clinton to win. When the independent Quinnipiac College Poll asked that question in a February 23, 1999, survey, New Yorkers said 57 - 33 percent that they expected Clinton to win. In that poll, she led Giuliani 54 - 36 percent.

Most of Clinton's numbers have declined in the last 12 months, and the head-to-head numbers with Giuliani have been virtually unchanged since October.

From February 2 - 5, Quinnipiac College surveyed 1,072 New York State registered voters. They survey has a margin of error of 3 percent.

"Today's big show by First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton may cause a thaw, but so far the Senate race seems frozen, with Mayor Giuliani holding on the high side of a sqeaker. Except for a bounce in her favorability, the indicators for Mrs. Clinton have dropped in the last 12 months and even some of her supporters think Mayor Giuliani will become Senator Giuliani," said Maurice Carroll, director of the Quinnipiac College Polling Institute.

"Giuliani continues to roll up big leads upstate and in the suburbs and is even cutting into Clinton's lead in heavily Democratic New York City."

The gender gap has disappeared in this latest survey: Giuliani gets 46 percent of men to Clinton's 42 percent, and 44 percent of women to Clinton's 42 percent, too close to call.

But Giuliani gets 52 percent of the white women vote, to Clinton's 34 percent.

By a 36 - 26 percent margin, voters have a favorable opinion of Giuliani, with 29 percent mixed and 9 percent saying they don't know enough to form an opinion. Giuliani's favorability was 41 - 30 percent in a January 20 Quinnipiac College Poll.

Clinton's favorability is 35 - 30 percent, with 29 percent mixed and 5 percent saying they don't know enough to form an opinion. This is her best favorability rating since June 30, 1999.

[mtnsnake]

20. Facts only relate to something that's already happened, not from speculation

That is a fact, so for you or I, or Quinnipiac for that matter, to say what would happen in the future is pure speculation, not fact. :smoke:

[Stephanie]

21. And the fact is, she was losing in the polls. And another fact is, you were wrong.

It's quite rich for you to make a completely unsupported, wild assertion and claim that I "know it," and then accuse ME of not knowing what a fact is! :rofl:

[mtnsnake]

22. Thanks for proving my point, genius. n/t

[Stephanie]

24. Excuse me? "She would've creamed Gullini. You know it, Gulaini knew it, everyone knew it"

In FACT, nobody knew any such thing, as the poll proves.

Kewl spelling for "Gulaini" - is that your own invention?

[mtnsnake]

16. dupe, double clicked.

[Kahuna]

27. She's losing???? What part of that don't you understand??? nt

[sueragingroz]

13. K it's february

let's look at some other february polls shall we?

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/410/how-reliable-are-the-early-presidential-polls

A review of polls conducted in the first quarter of the year preceding the election found many of them forecasting the wrong winner -- often by substantial margins. In February 1995, several early readings showed Sen. Bob Dole leading President Bill Clinton by as many as 6 percentage points. Twenty-one months later, Clinton won by 8 percentage points. In March 1991, President Bush had the support of 78% of the electorate against Democrat Mario Cuomo, the New York governor then perceived as the Democratic frontrunner. Bush lost to Clinton by 6 percentage points in 1992.

If folks base their decision about who they want as nominee based on GE type polls taken in February, they are in for a rude awakening.

[JimGinPA]

26. That's The Thing...

These people are wagering actual money and it is not based on polls, but a number of factors. It's supposed to be a more accurate predictor.:shrug:

[AtomicKitten]

23. Just like astrology, I like numbers like these when they are favorable.

They are and I am. ;)

[TexasObserver]

30. You and me both. I ignored them when they were betting Hillary the past year, so I'll ignore them.

[Zorra]

28. Gore would have an 80% chance. n/t

[Zorra]

29. Gore would have an 80% chance. n/t