Skip to comments.Electoral Map Based on Intrade Data
Posted on 10/24/2012 12:45:59 PM PDT by DoctorBulldog
The latest electoral map using Intrade's data shows Romney with 275 electoral votes to Obama's 263 electoral votes.
Not a bad idea.
I wonder if Kenya would take Obama?
That would be just far enough away from us.
I respectfully disagree, just barely. Romney doesn't need N.H. He also needs more than just OH and one.
Based on 2008 results, Romney needs, in order of easiest pick-ups by percentage: NC, In, Fl, Oh, Va, Co. That gives him 275. This is exactly what the in-trade map shows and these are the easiest states (and the minimum needed) to pick-up based on percentage swing from 2008. Of course Romney must hold on to Mo., which McCain won by 0.13%. Should Romney lose that, the easiest states for him to pick up to make up the difference, are Iowa and N. H. Under that scenario you are more accurate.
i’m joinin’ the many who count NC, In, Fl, Va in the Romney column. Leaving OH and one other necessary.
The state markets on Intrade were very thinly traded until about mid-September of this year.
Keep up the great work!
“I was in New Mexico last week. I only saw one Romney sign, many OBAMANOS bumper stickers.”
You must have been in the northern part of the state (north of Roswell).
We are another state that could use a good split. Two different worlds in the same state. Unfortunately, Albuquerque “out-numbers” us.
Stephen, a recent poll disclosed that Obozo’s popularity among KENYANS has sunk to new lows.
Seems they won’t take him either.
Not necessarily. A candidate may have a better than 50% chance of winning in every state, and yet still have a less than 50% chance of winning an election. For example, suppose there were three equal-sized states X, Y, and Z. Fred has a 40% chance of winning all three states, a 20% chance of winning only X, a 20% chance of winning only Y, and a 20% chance of winning only Z. Fred would have a 60% chance of winning X, and a 60% chance of winning Y, and a 60% chance of winning Z, but only a 40% chance of winning at least two of the three.
Wow. Am I reading that right, is it minus 180 to plus 150, or just 180 to 150?
That make sense. Darn it! ;^)
You’re correct, I was in the Albuquerque, Santa Fe area.
Minus 180 if you bet Obama, plus 150 if you bet Romney.
I don’t like it but it has come down. It has been favoring Obama all along and has been much higher.
I’m not promoting gambling here, just stating facts.
” Stephen, a recent poll disclosed that Obozos popularity among KENYANS has sunk to new lows.
Seems they wont take him either.”
Could we try Hugo Chavez ?
Thanks. I hadn’t heard of that forum before, so I appreciate the explanation.
Intrade is moving Obama back up today.
60/40? I’m not believing that...
Today the odds at Sports-Gambling are Obama minus 210, Romney plus 175.
Damn those odds suck. That being said I like to go with the underdog.
Thanks. I noticed Intrade has Obama at 63.4% and Romney at 37.5% this morning.
I’m not sure what these folks are smoking, but it seems like it’s eating their head from the inside out.
I don’t know what to make of it. I don’t think it’s accurate, but then who knows.
BTW: Since the first of the week, Obama started around where he is now and fell by 7% or so. Now he’s back up. Strange.
Interesting that today SG has completly removed the odds on the Presidential race.. It may be that they figure the odds have moved in Romney’s favor and they don’t want to chance being caught in the middle.