# What are the odds of Trump winning the Presidency in 2024? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Tags:** trump\ **Created:** [January 21, 2024, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-odds-of-trump-winning-the-presidency-in-2024/996454 "2024-01-21T23:50:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2024, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-odds-of-trump-winning-the-presidency-in-2024/996454/223 "2024-02-18T16:38:33Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > If you see an implied probability that seems so badly wrong, you need to understand _why_ it is that in this particular situation there is so much dumb money distorting the price and why other smart money is shying away from taking the other side Though it’s not an unusual situation. Whenever you get a situation where people are inclined to bet with their heart rather than their head. The dumb people end up subsidizing the smart people. The classic example of this is I’ve seen is England coming into major football tournament. Not so much in recent year’s when they’ve been actually quite fancied, but in their “being knocked out by Iceland in the group stages” period you’ll still see odds of England winning the world cup or euros that are clearly inflated. And it’s because English people (who make up a larger proportion of the betting public relative to their population) are betting on who they want to win, not who will likely win. > [@Riemann](#): > > I’d tie up cash on this for 9 months for a 7% excess return, but not for a 3% excess return. So where are you getting a guaranteed risk free 4% return on investment in 9 months? I need to join your bank 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2024, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-odds-of-trump-winning-the-presidency-in-2024/996454/224 "2024-02-18T16:42:13Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > So where are you getting a guaranteed risk free 4% return on investment in 9 months? 9-month Treasury yield is 5.1%. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2024, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-odds-of-trump-winning-the-presidency-in-2024/996454/225 "2024-02-18T16:47:48Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > The classic example of this is I’ve seen is England coming into major football tournament. Yes, that’s exactly the kind of _explanation_ for a distorted price I look for when taking the other side. But I see no obvious parallel in vast numbers of people wanting to back Obama for President at any price for sentimental reasons. The only weird thing I’m aware of is right wing conspiracy theories about her running - scaremongering (to those who are horrified by the idea of a Black female President), thinking it will undermine unity around Biden, that kind of thing. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2024, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-odds-of-trump-winning-the-presidency-in-2024/996454/226 "2024-02-18T16:50:39Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > out by Iceland in the group stages” period you’ll still see odds of England winning the world cup or euros that are clearly inflated. You also see this with other big betting nations. See [here](https://www.vegasinsider.com/soccer/odds/world-cup/) for the 2026 world cup. I mean China having the same odds as Iran (1 appearance vs 6 appearances) ? IMO that’s more to do with the number Chinese punters (of whom there are a lot, even before the rise of China as a economic superpower) betting on their home nation than some secret info about the Chinese football federation. And the US are the hosts but does that really justify having 2x the likelihood as 2016 finalists Croatia? ---
**Author:** ![colinfred](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colinfred/32/21338_2.png) [@colinfred](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/colinfred)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2024, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-odds-of-trump-winning-the-presidency-in-2024/996454/227 "2024-02-18T16:58:01Z")
Association football gets more and more popular in the US each year, and the US still has the population and resources to be world leaders at pretty much anything they’re really interested in: I’ve always thought the US is underpriced, I wouln’t be surprised to see them winning a Mens World Cup soon. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2024, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-odds-of-trump-winning-the-presidency-in-2024/996454/228 "2024-02-18T17:14:31Z")
> [@colinfred](#): > > I’ve always thought the US is underpriced, I wouln’t be surprised to see them winning a Mens World Cup soon. Total sidetrack, but I’d still say the US being rated as _twice_ as likely as Croatia who made the final in 2016 is more to do with US punters betting for their home team, than the home advantage, the rise of US soccer, and aging Croatian golden generation. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2024, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-odds-of-trump-winning-the-presidency-in-2024/996454/229 "2024-02-18T19:09:52Z")
Did you have to commit the 1000 pounds in cash? In other words are you forfeiting the interest you would have earned had you put the money into a GIC or other interest bearing account? (I can currently get around 5%) ---
**Author:** ![colinfred](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colinfred/32/21338_2.png) [@colinfred](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/colinfred)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2024, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-odds-of-trump-winning-the-presidency-in-2024/996454/230 "2024-02-18T19:13:09Z")
Yes, I have to have as much as my maximum liability in Betfair funds. I’m hoping the Obama nonsense will fade within a couple of months, then I can cash out at the much higher price rather than waiting til November and forfeiting the interest. ---
**Author:** ![suranyi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e36b37/32.png) [@suranyi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/suranyi)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2024, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-odds-of-trump-winning-the-presidency-in-2024/996454/231 "2024-02-18T19:14:36Z")
The thing is, as an American, there are very few sites that allow you to bet on politics at all, and those that do allow a maximum wager of $850. ---
**Author:** ![suranyi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e36b37/32.png) [@suranyi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/suranyi)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2024, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-odds-of-trump-winning-the-presidency-in-2024/996454/232 "2024-02-18T19:19:37Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > If most of the betting interest is foreign, I don’t see how that supports the idea that dumb money is backing Obama with insufficient smart money to lay her. I think foreign money would tend to be _more_ dispassionate and focused on true probabilities. In my experience the vast majority of foreigners are clueless about American politics. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2024, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-odds-of-trump-winning-the-presidency-in-2024/996454/233 "2024-02-18T19:33:09Z")
> [@suranyi](#): > > In my experience the vast majority of foreigners are clueless about American politics. But that’s the point. Most foreigners are clueless about American politics because they _don’t care about it_. So among foreigners, you are not likely to have a lot of dumb price-insensitive punters backing Obama for sentimental reasons. Whereas there are always dispassionate pros with a lot of smart money who will research the details of the election of the attorney general of Papua New Guinea if they think there’s an edge. Prices are most likely to get out of whack when you have a very large number of sentimental punters relative to the dispassionate smart money. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2024, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-odds-of-trump-winning-the-presidency-in-2024/996454/234 "2024-02-18T20:02:21Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > Prices are most likely to get out of whack when you have a very large number of sentimental punters relative to the dispassionate smart money. I think that’s exactly what is going on in this case. Wishful thinkers who don’t understand the American electoral process. ---
**Author:** ![Lance\_Turbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lance_turbo/32/6156_2.png) [@Lance\_Turbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lance_Turbo)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2024, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-odds-of-trump-winning-the-presidency-in-2024/996454/235 "2024-02-18T21:43:38Z")
What you’re seeing in an example of [favorite-longshot bias](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Favourite-longshot_bias). There’s no agreed upon reason why his occurs, but it is indisputable that it does. The paper I’m about to introduce includes this explanation, “Wolfers and Zitzewitz (2007) show that in addition to nonrisk neutral investing, the favorite-longshot bias inherent to prediction markets is caused by transaction costs and liquidity concerns.” Economist David Rothschild wrote a paper on this phenomenon in the specific context of election betting markets: [Forecasting Elections: Comparing Prediction Markets, Polls, and Their Biases](https://researchdmr.com/RothschildPOQ2009). Here’s a paragraph relevant to this discussion: > In a recent paper in this journal, Erikson and Wlezien (2008) advance the debate between polls and prediction markets when they argue that while raw prediction market prices may provide more accurate forecasts than raw polls, adjusting the polls for known biases reverses this result. Thus, they argue that “market prices contain little information of value for forecasting beyond the information already available in the polls” (2008, p. 24). The problem is that Erikson and Wlezien do not advance the literature far enough. Their paper is the first empirical comparison that includes debiased polls and it is the first to focus on probability of victory, rather than just expected vote share. **But the authors treat the well-documented favorite-longshot bias in prediction markets as a weakness of the markets rather than a systematic bias that can easily be corrected.** In their conclusion they note the persistent problem of “The winner-takes-all market … overvaluing longshot candidates’ chances of victory” (p. 24). He gives the following formula for that correction: p = \Phi(1.64 \cdot\Phi^{-1}(p\_i)), where \Phi is the standard normal cumulative distribution function, p\_i is the implied probability of the market price, and 1.64 is a best fit constant determined with out of sample data. Let’s see what this means with respect to Obama’s chances in 2024. I can’t see BetFair prices, but I can see [Polymarket](https://polymarket.com/event/presidential-election-winner-2024) which seem to be in line with the BetFair numbers I’ve seen in recent posts. Polymarket currently has Obama yes at 0.068 and Obama no at 0.940. These sum to 1.008 so we’ll normalize yes/no to get p\_i = 0.068 / 1.008 \approx 0.0675. Thus we get p = \Phi(1.64 \cdot\Phi^{-1}(0.0675)) = 0.0071 \< 1\%. Now the market doesn’t seem so crazy. It’s just doing something (mildly irrational at best) that markets normally do. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-the-odds-of-trump-winning-the-presidency-in-2024/996454.md?page=11)