Skip to comments.Obama down to 61% on intrade (MSM lies inflating chances?)
Posted on 10/13/2012 11:30:06 PM PDT by the53percenter
0bama's self destruction has dropped his intrade chances by 20% since the debate but its still way high. Is Soros manipulating the market to mean 0bama has a chance?
I believe the Intrade was being artificially pumped. There is no way that you can have so many, and strong, drops amongst identifiable voters and still be in a strong position to win the election.
That drop from 90% to 61% probably indicates the smart money is leaving Intrade.
On Realclear Politics, I looked at the electoral college numbers, and it seems like Romney needs Ohio desperately + 1 more state (New Hampshire, Colorado, or Nevada). That seems the most likely scenario as of today.
I think betting 61% on Obama is pretty foolish atm.
Soros knows how to hedge his bets. Whether Bambi wins or not, Soros wins. Either he gets to pursue his agenda, or he makes tons of bucks on Intrade.
In Trade has less predictive value than polls since it only takes a concerted buying effort by one person to significantly change the results.
That was my thought as well. As long as obongo is ahead of the polling predictions for the electoral count (O 201 R 191), he will be ahead in Intrade.
Degenerate gamblers apparently can’t read.
As a group, Intrade gamblers were awful at predicting the outcome of the Supreme Court's Obamacare decision.
When I go to a convenience store, I can't say that I've ever seen anyone buying Lotto tickets that I'd ask for financial advice.
It’s obvious the empty chair has no chance. Whoever is betting on intrade right now is either hopelessly misinformed or a liberal. Just plunked down $500 on Romney. I’ll be celebrating twice on election day.
Intrade looks to me as if being supported by folks outside the US. I don’t believe they have the benefit of understanding the sentiment here - all they get is the influence of their own media, which is heavily liberal. I am surprised Romney is so low.
It really does look like an easy way to make some money right now - if you’re into it, and trust them.
But in 2004, George Bush was doing much better on Intrade -- the gamblers were predicting a landslide -- and he squeaked in with 50.7% of the popular vote. I'm guessing that there is a gambler's bias towards incumbents or horses or sports teams that have already won something.
You could be correct.
I just know that it doesn’t represent reality and I know the left are going all out this election to win it, by making it seem that Obama has a stronger hand than he does.
I’m kicking myself for not buying some Romney “stock” on Intrade a couple weeks ago. I would have but didn’t get around to getting an account set up.
To bet on that site they require you send them all kinds of proof of citizenship. I know many good conservatives including myself who will not share the info. I think that skews the results. Go to the site and ask to sign up and it will give you the requirements.
Yardstick - it still looks like you can double your money if you get in. Romney was trading under 40 and a Romney win would be 100....
If this was a US based trading platform I’d feel more comfortable in placing trades.... seems shady to me, and it seemed expensive.
You can buy every Obama share on InTrade for less than $2000 at the lowest price available.
That's a lot less than the millions Obama spends on advertising every day.