Why Vote When You Can Bet?

Slate ^ | 5/2/07

[areafiftyone]

Why Vote When You Can Bet? Slate's guide to all the political markets.

The idea behind political prediction markets is simple. Lots of people wager on the outcome of political campaigns: Who's going to be the Democratic presidential nominee? Will the Republicans take back the House? And when the votes are counted, the winning bettors collect. The thrill of prediction markets for political junkies is that they harness "the wisdom of crowds." A single person's bet on an election outcome isn't very good, but thousands of bets, with real stakes, are more likely to predict the correct result than even the best pundit. The Iowa Electronic Markets, the big daddy of the political prediction markets, is consistently better at forecasting winners than pre-election polls. (Read a 2003 Slate "Explainer" about prediction markets here.)

If a single prediction market is wiser than the pundits and the polls, imagine how wise all the prediction markets are together. That's the idea behind Slate's "Political Futures," which offers a comprehensive guide to all the big political prediction markets. From now until Election Day 2008, we'll publish regular updates of the key data from Iowa Electronic Markets,

Intrade.com, Newsfutures.com, and Casualobserver.net. (Casualobserver has not yet launched its 2008 political prediction market, but we will add it as soon as it goes up.) In these early days of the campaign, we are tracking four markets: 1) Democratic nominee for president, 2) Republican nominee for president, 3) presidential victor, and 4) party control of the presidency. We'll add Senate and House races as they heat up next year.

[areafiftyone]

Republican Presidential Nominee Race for 2008

Click here to see an overview of changes for the month.

Current Market Value
Per Candidate

Current Individual
Market Values

Loading...
	Intrade		Iowa Electronic		News Futures
Candidate	Price	Change	Price	Change	Price	Change
Rudy Giuliani	31.80	+0.100	31.10	+0.012	33.00	-4.000
John McCain	19.00	-1.000	18.00	-0.014	37.00	-1.000
Mitt Romney	15.20	-0.200	17.50	-0.005	24.00	+0.000
Fred Thompson	15.10	+0.300	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Chuck Hagel	3.20	+0.200	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Newt Gingrich	3.00	-0.300	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Mike Huckabee	2.40	+0.000	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Condoleezza Rice	1.20	+0.000	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Michael Bloomberg	1.00	+0.000	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Sam Brownback	0.60	+0.000	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Dick Cheney	0.40	+0.000	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Tom Tancredo	0.30	+0.000	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Colin Powell	0.20	+0.000	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Tommy Franks	0.10	+0.000	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a

Note: Click a market name in the above table to see a graph of those movements (which are updated once an hour).

 

Go to these market sites:
Intrade
Iowa Electronic Markets
Casual Observer

[Atlas Sneezed]

Fred’s a bargain. So is Edwards on the Dem side, IMO.

[CharlesWayneCT]

So, where is Duncan Hunter?

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

This is a good post — electronic prediction markets are a powerful tool. I’ve followed them for several years (and posted the market value of politicians and parties on FR several times).

The markets take take all information about the election into account — and they react to changing events very rapidly. Unlike polls, they don’t ask you how you would vote — they ask you to consider how everyone else will vote. They also require people to "put their money where their mouth is".

[areafiftyone]

You know I didn’t even notice that. This is weird. It has Tommy Franks but no Duncan Hunter.

[BackInBlack]

“Putting your money where your mouth is” is the key. Markets always predict stuff better.