Nader: “I’m going on tour with Green Day!”
Post-debate update from http://www.electoral-vote.com/, 10/0/04:
Keeping in mind the standard warning about polls, todays Rasmussen poll:
Today 49.6(Bush) 45.9(Kerry)
Update, 10/12/04:
http://www.race2004.net/ now counts 196 EVs for Bush, 222 for Kerry, 120 Undecided.
If Bush wins the electoral vote and Kerry wins the popular vote . . . well, Bush will be president, of course, but maybe it will spark a new movement to abolish the EC.
http://www.electoral-vote.com/ now counts 260 EVs for Kerry, 274 for Bush, with New Hampshire (4 EVs) the only state “Exactly Tied.”
You should stick to one voting site to maintain a trend BG…just my opinion. I notice on the first site Kerry has NM (its ‘weak Kerry’) while on the one you normally use Bush has NM (‘weak Bush’).
Still too close to call. Maybe things will fall out tomorrow after the debate, but I think its going to come down to the wire…no one will REALLY have any idea until after the final votes are counted. Its going to be another VERY close election just like the last one…unfortunately.
-XT
Why “unfortunately”? This is the kind of thing that makes politics exciting! Just think of all the citizens who shrugged off the whole thing in 2000 and are getting really involved and engaged now!
Because I don’t think the country needs another controversial election at this time…one that comes down to the wire and may be decided by a few votes like in Florida last time. I was hoping for something a bit clearer myself, though I guess the country is pretty well divided between Kerry and Bush.
I AM happy that maybe this time more than 50% of the people will actually get off their butts and go out and vote though…thats a good thing IMO.
-XT
In the objective of fair and balanced, www.electoral-vote.com now has the election slightly in favor of Bush, 274-260. Ohio’s change in the Rasmussen polls (see Brutus’s cite above) is the difference at this point.
I have been following the race using a different yardstick: www.betfair.com. They have been offering a market on the election: $2 million plus so far been matched on it. They had Bush and Kerry at evens just before the Republican convention. Bush moved to 2 to 1 on prior to the first debate. Kerry has recovered since then and currently stands at about 6 to 4. In other words, the people who are willing to back their judgements with money are giving Bush a 60% chance of winning. In yet more words, it is still very close.
I looked at that site, but I’m not enough of a gambler to fully understand what a lot of it meant. (Republicans, Democrats, Back, Lay, three columns with dollar amounts for each… does not compute!)
What happens if the vote goes the way of the last and the Supreme Court decides the winner? Is that a “push”?
Wouldn’t ‘Kerry 6-4’ imply that he’s now the anticipated winner? Maybe I’m not understanding the nomenclature but generally one gets less than one’s bet back when one is betting the safe way. Bigger returns come from betting against the conventional wisdom.
Those are not dollar amounts, they are decimal odds. Look at the two middle columns for, say, the Republicans and take the average (currently 1.65 and 1.67, hence 1.66). You can then click on odds converter to see what odds that equates to in conventional bookies’ terminology. Alternatively, take the reciprical and that gives you the % chance of presidency, for example Bush gets 1/1.66 x 100 = 60.24%.
I think there will be a short cooling off period after results are announced. If there is any chance of a Supreme Court overrule, I imagine Betfair will defer settling the market.
No. 6 to 4 means if you bet 4 you will get 6 back plus your stake. A real outsider might be 100 to 1. Back that and if it comes in you will get 100 back plus your 1 stake.
Another interesting “gambling” site is the Iowa Electronic Market which currently has Bush ahead in both the winner take all and the vote share markets, but not by much.
Rick
Where’s Jimmy the Greek when we need him?
I will concede that it does not sound very scientific to look at a gambling site to get an impression of the state of play in a presidential election. Nonetheless, if the market has sufficient liquidity I believe it can be a reliable indicator. There will be many “gamblers” out there with a good knowledge of statistics who will be keeping a close eye on the latest opinion polls and any other relevant data. If there is any gap between what the polls are saying and the state of the market, the market will move very quickly to correct itself. There are quite a few serious gamblers who trade on betting exchanges in the same way that investors trade on the stock market.
I dunno. What were Bush’s ancestors bred for?
Since we’re hijacking anyway, posters here might be very interested in this week’s Frontline program - a 2-hour in-depth profile and comparison of Bush and Kerry. Couple of my relatives happened to catch it last night & said it was fascinating and full of information they hadn’t seen elsewhere.
Update from http://www.electoral-vote.com/, 10/15/04: Count is now given as 228 EVs for Kerry, 284 for Bush – but it’s a lot closer than those numbers make it sound.
http://www.race2004.net/ gives the count at 223 for Bush, 222 for Kerry, 93 Undecided:
Also noteworthy is that a number of the state polls on that website were conducted by Strategic Vision, a Republican polling group which has become notorious for skewing its samples. More on Strategic Vision as relates to polling in Georgia here. From that article:
This calls into question the value of Strategic Vision’s polls (reflected on electoral-vote.com) in such critical states as Wisconsin, New Jersey, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.