HUFFPOLLSTER: Prediction Markets Give Democrats A 72 Percent Chance Of Keeping The White House

[DCBob]

PREDICTION MARKETS FAVOR THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE IN NOVEMBER- David Rothschild: “The 10 March 15 primaries (five Democratic and five Republican) went just as expected, if you were following the prediction markets. On prediction markets around the world, people bought and sold contracts on any candidate winning...These contract prices are aggregated on my website, PredictWise.com, and turned into probabilities of any candidate winning any election….After Trump’s and Clinton’s strong showing on March 15, the markets predicted that the eventual Democratic nominee will win, at a probability of 72 percent….Here’s another point of reference. At this point in the 2012 presidential race, Barack Obama running for reelection was valued at a 60 percent likelihood to win….For March 16 of an election year, 72 percent is a very high probability of winning.” (WashPost)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/prediction-markets-2016-race_us_56ebf46ce4b03a640a6a3039

So Bernie's strategy of trying to convince the Super Delegates to switch due to electability is bogus.

[rock]

1. "I can't beat Clinton but I can beat Trump"

Bogus? Yep!

[DCBob]

2. LOL..

[thesquanderer]

4. Clinton is his tougher competitor, no doubt.

How Sanders performs against Clinton doesn't say anything about how he would perform against Trump. Different opponent. Different pool of voters.

As I said early on, it would be tougher for him to win the primary than the general.

The primary process is not perfect. If it's Trump vs Clinton, I'd say that neither of the parties put up their most-likely-to-succeed candidate.

[workinclasszero]

10. LOL

[thesquanderer]

3. Here's why Sanders' claim of greater electability is not bogus, from your own linked info

Look at the chart you posted, the original is at

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-general-election-trump-vs-clinton

Using the arrows on the left and right, you can see all the other match-ups. These are what you'll see:

Yes, Clinton beats Trump 49.6% to 40.5%, up 9.1.
but Sanders beats Trump 55.5% to 41%, up 14.5
...Sanders wins more handily

Clinton beats Cruz, 48% to 44.3%, up 3.7
Sanders beats Cruz 55.1% 44.9%, up 5.2
...Sanders wins more handily

Clinton loses to Kasich 48% to 41.6%, loses by 6.4
Sanders beats Kasich 45% to 42%, up 3
...Sanders wins, Clinton loses

We are luckily in a position where a Dem is very likely going to win. As you said, predictwise puts the odds at 72%. But that figure is largely, in essence, a composite of all the information above (weighted by things like the fact that they think Clinton has a 95% chance of being the nominee, etc.). Take out the weaker contests and leave in the stronger ones, the odds go up. Clinton drags the figure down, Sanders moves the figure up. 72% is good, but no sure thing. Increasing the odds would be a good thing.

[DCBob]

5. Sanders benefits greatly from not being the front runner.

If he does miraculously become the nominee the full force of the GOP attack machine will descend like a ton of bricks on Bernie and his numbers will drop.. I have no doubt.

Hillary has been the focus of relentless GOP attacks for many many years and yet she still comes out on top.

We have an amazing nominee! Its time to get on board the Hillary victory train!

[thesquanderer]

9. re: "Hillary has been the focus of relentless GOP attacks...yet she still comes out on top"

No, she only comes out on top among the Dem base. Outside of the base, Hillary has been the focus of relentless GOP attacks for many many years and has been rewarded with amazingly high unfavorables.

As detailed at http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027695472#post20 she's viewed unfavorably by more than half the pop, and outside of the Dem base (which represents only 29% of the pop), she is viewed unfavorably by 68%. That's not coming out on top. That's also at least part of why Sanders is coming out better than she is in those figures in my post.

re: "If he does miraculously become the nominee the full force of the GOP attack machine will descend like a ton of bricks on Bernie and his numbers will drop" --

As I said in another post, no matter what the GOP would unload on him, I don't think it's possible for them to do as much damage to him in a few months as it took them 25 years to do to Hillary Clinton. They could turn every single "unsure" person against him, and still not get his unfavorables as high as Hillary's already are.

And honestly, I don't know that they have so much to work with against him. If there were real skeletons to be found, I expect that Hillary's people would have found them. I'm not saying he'll get off scott free, sure there's stuff they can twist, stuff they can make up, but that's par for the course. And it's not like Hillary doesn't have more stuff the GOP can throw at her in the general, either. Bernie has been handling her with kid gloves. Hillary will not only again be facing all the old Clinton scandals (some true, some not) which Bernie never mentions, but also new ones (i.e. emails, Clinton Foundation accusations). So it's not like Bernie is the only one who can be knocked further down. At least he's starting from a stronger position!

The point remains, there is a very good argument to be made that Bernie is more electable in November. You may not personally buy it, but it's not a bogus case.

[DCBob]

13. She tops Trump who is their likely nominee.

I still maintain that Bernie would be buried by the GOP attack machine.. he has too many "low hanging fruit" weaknesses they can exploit.

[lostnfound]

6. The Republicans managed to support the two guys that makes Hillary "electable"

It was tough, between the rightwing's anti-Clinton hysteria and the leftwing's desire to mitigate the damage done by 30 years of Trickle down economics and interventionist or imperial foreign policies. But they found two candidates, Trump and Cruz, that are so despicable that we are left with no choice.

Nice job, TPTB. This election season has been choreographed by professionals...

Bernie is or has been so close to throwing a wrench in it.

[rgbecker]

7. Thank goodness I won't have to vote for Clinton.

Since she is a shoe in over Trump, I'll stay home and not have to admit to anyone I voted for a war mongering corporate shill.

[DCBob]

8. Who said she is a shoe in??

These are predictive markets and could be totally wrong. All Democrats need to vote regardless.

[rgbecker]

11. "These are predictive markets and could be totally wrong."

I missed that in your original post.

[DCBob]

14. That wasnt the focus of the article.

But the article did mention that towards the end.

[thesquanderer]

12. Yup, 72% is definitely not a shoe-in.

That's still a 1-in-4 chance of losing.

And as I pointed out earlier, that 72% would be even lower (slightly) if you factored out the small (5%) chance that Sanders wins the nomination. Take out his better numbers against the Republicans, and the 72% figure would fall a bit.

Point is, regardless of who the Dem nominee is, nobody can get cocky here, GOTV will still be important.

ETA: and yes, predictive markets are not flawless!