|
Lutha Mahtin posted:I was being coy about this before, but I'm going to spill the beans because I think it's funny. A few days ago I moved into a position where I have NOs on the four high tranches and YES on the bottom four. I thought that bettors were overreacting to Clinton's convention bounce and Trump's Hell-week. Surely we would see some regression from that craziness, right? Nope, now we have Trump joking about Presidential assassination, buddying up with Mark Foley, and going back to the "they founded ISIS" line Same here. I just exited with modest losses on everything below "400 or more" based on the Manafort/Russia news and the WSJ call for Trump to drop out This clown car has no breaks
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 03:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 23:06 |
|
|
thethreeman posted:Same here. I just exited with modest losses on everything below "400 or more" based on the Manafort/Russia news and the WSJ call for Trump to drop out I'm dipping my toe in this after months away, but I put the odds of Clinton winning 400+ somewhere just over 0%. I don't see a viable path without her flipping a very deep red state.  If the polls are 100% correct and election held today Clinton would have 362. Absolute ceiling would be her winning everything on the map plus Arizona, Missouri, Indiana, Nebraska-2 and Maine-2. She is still at 396. I think Georgia is a stretch
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 04:22
|
|
|
Well if she wins Indiana and Missouri she would almost certainly win South Carolina as well, putting her over 400.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
OctoberBlues posted:Well if she wins Indiana and Missouri she would almost certainly win South Carolina as well, putting her over 400. Maybe? I just checked. Trump really up only 2 in the PPP poll? So weird to think of South Carolina going Dem. Only time it went Democratic in recent history was in 1976. That map is unrecognizable to our eyes, sort of a Democratic last gasp from 1960 and before when it ALWAYS voted Democratic as part of the solid south.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 04:58
|
|
|
There's just not a fourteen percent chance of all those states flipping, you could hedge your bet a little by betting on each of those swing states individually.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 05:04
|
|
|
Senate approving Obama's SCOTUS pick seems very favorably priced in the low 30's. Probably not until after the election but no reason they couldn't do it in a lame duck session with a president elect Clinton looming
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 01:18
|
|
|
Zeta Taskforce posted:Senate approving Obama's SCOTUS pick seems very favorably priced in the low 30's. Probably not until after the election but no reason they couldn't do it in a lame duck session with a president elect Clinton looming Safer bet is Garland to be the next Justice in my opinion, if you can get it sub-50. It's pricier, but you get lame duck + plenty of equity that Clinton sticks with him.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 02:47
|
|
|
Arkane posted:Safer bet is Garland to be the next Justice in my opinion, if you can get it sub-50. It's pricier, but you get lame duck + plenty of equity that Clinton sticks with him. That additional "equity" is worth about a penny in my opinion, but reasonable minds may differ on this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 03:08
|
|
|
Arkane posted:Safer bet is Garland to be the next Justice in my opinion, if you can get it sub-50. It's pricier, but you get lame duck + plenty of equity that Clinton sticks with him. You make a good point. http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/hillary-clinton-merrick-garland-nomination-226967 I can see Hillary keeping Garland if no lame duck appointment. I think the words I would use to describe that choice would be "safe" and "boring".
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 04:08
|
|
|
Zeta Taskforce posted:You make a good point. Garland is 63, he's far from ideal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 05:12
|
|
|
It's starting to feel like we're going to have to wait until September to see the official July fundraising numbers. Last time I make a bet on those.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 20:31
|
|
|
Internet Webguy posted:It's starting to feel like we're going to have to wait until September to see the official July fundraising numbers. Last time I make a bet on those. The numbers were always coming out on the 20th, as they always have...
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
Internet Webguy posted:It's starting to feel like we're going to have to wait until September to see the official July fundraising numbers. Last time I make a bet on those. How do you even bet on that? Fill me in, I've been gone for 6 months. It seems even worse than betting on polls
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
with fundraising you at least have an end result that is predictable. you know when the number is going to drop and you know it is based on a real thing. so you can make educated guesses. you can do some analysis based on historical statistics, and sometimes campaigns release numbers early to brag it's still very volatile and risky, though
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
Lutha Mahtin posted:with fundraising you at least have an end result that is predictable. you know when the number is going to drop and you know it is based on a real thing. so you can make educated guesses. you can do some analysis based on historical statistics, and sometimes campaigns release numbers early to brag And just about every contract is trading around 98 cents so it is either an unlikely lottery ticket or a risky way to tie up lots of money. Right now I like DWS keeping her house seat
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
the fundraising markets are weird this month because several of the campaigns announced numbers very early that destroyed the PI brackets. i haven't actually looked into the campaign statements but if they're true, Johnson and Stein will be taking in multiples of their B1 number the last two months were a lot more sane, with predictors disagreeing for multiple legitimate reasons
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
Lutha Mahtin posted:the fundraising markets are weird this month because several of the campaigns announced numbers very early that destroyed the PI brackets. i haven't actually looked into the campaign statements but if they're true, Johnson and Stein will be taking in multiples of their B1 number Really glad I didn't get caught up in the Johnson fundraising insanity this month, that door slammed shut quickly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
Campaigns will usually have a preview of their fundraising numbers near the end of the month but the thing is you don't know how it will split between the party and the campaign. It is typically enough info that you can hedge your bets fairly well. At least that is how it works in the major parties, not sure about 3rd parties. I knew it was fairly late in the month but didn't realize it was the 20th. Thanks for the info.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 22:38
|
|
|
Hillary finally told her first Pants On Fire lie this month and the market was sloooow to react. Hello 40% increase to bankroll flipping B5 NO. I'd keep on eye on that market, guys. She has to make just one more PoF statement in the month of August for B5 ("1 or fewer" false statements) to resolve No, AND the market stays active until 11:59pm on September 9th to allow Politifact a chance to post something she said back in August. Once the No price decays back into the teens I am buying right back in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 01:06
|
|
|
On the subject of fundraising, I know that Trump has said he raised $80 million in July. However that included money for the RNC, does his campaign give that money to the RNC, thus having it count on line 7 of his FEC Report or does it go directly to the RNC?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 02:05
|
|
|
I put some money in Hillary > 370 What the hell. Nothing stops Trump's clown train.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 03:34
|
|
|
Gyges posted:On the subject of fundraising, I know that Trump has said he raised $80 million in July. However that included money for the RNC, does his campaign give that money to the RNC, thus having it count on line 7 of his FEC Report or does it go directly to the RNC? the thing that counts for the market is that one line on that one form, and only for the campaign committee # in the market's rules section. candidates can (and do) have more than one committee that is raising funds for them so you have to be careful when they trumpet some big number. and if the thing you're talking about is a joint fundraising committee, those things are even more complicated, with money being split up and moved around also it's trump, so he could be confused or just pulling numbers out of his butt
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 04:46
|
|
|
EngineerSean posted:I made some cash on this this week which didn't offset the losses from various Trump meltdowns. The train isn't stopping here, buy the top 2 brackets for Clinton as soon as they're determined tomorrow. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 07:36
|
|
|
I warned you bro!!
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 14:26
|
|
|
It's just too much fun, I can't stop.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
there's a market up for new york city's mayoral election. that election will occur on november 7th...of next year 
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
Do we have any idea on if they'll put up demographics markets for the general? I'd love to bet on whether Trump or Hillary who will win Jewish Men 55+ who also identify as Native American.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Do we have any idea on if they'll put up demographics markets for the general? I'd love to bet on whether Trump or Hillary who will win Jewish Men 55+ who also identify as Native American. Email in and suggest it, at this point it looks like Trump is only going to win no-college white men but maybe they could find something interesting there
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 17:52
|
|
|
There needs to be an official data source. Demographic results only come from exit polling, right? Also - they have a "market suggestions" forum on their support page https://predictit.freshdesk.com/support/discussions/forums/5000219262
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
I requested markets based on exit polling a few months ago. The two I requested: who wins indies and what percent of Republicans vote for Hillary. I asked for the market to be based on the CNN exit poll at noon following election day (they all share the same exit poll source but CNN has reliably updated all of the results on their webpage). Demographics definitely offer more market possibilities.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
Vacation shortly; anything interesting to park money in for a few weeks? DWS was the only thing that jumped out at me, but at 91c it's pretty lackluster (this poo poo IS still a lock, right? Chat's all hyping Canova but I assume that's pumpers and/or idiots) Also, browsing around and you can get Republican Georgia yes for 62c, holy poo poo: https://www.predictit.org/Market/2113/Which-party-will-win-Georgia-in-the-2016-presidential-election I can't imagine that won't readjust up when Trump has a decent cycle. There's probably also a nice leverage package possible (with the EC markets?) but this is beyond my spreadsheet capabilities for the moment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 12:41
|
|
|
Real bummed I didn't buy any of those Manafort shares when they opened up because they were dirt cheap at ~40 :\
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 15:06
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:Real bummed I didn't buy any of those Manafort shares when they opened up because they were dirt cheap at ~40 Meanwhile, managed to snag a ton at 50-60 right as news broke. Thanks, Manafaort!
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:Real bummed I didn't buy any of those Manafort shares when they opened up because they were dirt cheap at ~40 I did and sold them a few hours later with they were 56. Not bad to make 20 cents in a couple hours. I kicked myself when I realized I could have gotten $1 had I waited another day
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
If you want to buy lotto tickets for Jill Stein Fundraising, now's the time! Edit: Johnson just came in at 1.6M Comedy fact: Lindsay Graham took in 56K during July and owes $0. Rand Paul took in  and owes $300K 
OAquinas has issued a correction as of 00:47 on Aug 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 23:33
|
|
|
Is it just me, or does the "remember me" checkbox cause this site to remember your session for less time?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
drat, wish I had shorted B1 for more on Hillary's spending.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 01:34
|
|
|
Congrats Vox, if you held onto that Trump fundraising bet
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 04:53
|
|
|
Yea that was a nice tip. Made $130 off it, myself
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 12:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 23:06 |
|
|
I was pretty worried about it but yeah, the Trump fundraising put me in the black. I'm back in!
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 20:15
|
|