Prediction Markets Score the Debate a Rout: Clinton Over Trump

[DemocratSinceBirth]

According to the people who put money on the line in the political prediction markets, Hillary Clinton clearly won the first debate.

Here’s why the markets are a useful scorekeeper. When the final bell rings and the pugilists return to their handlers, you turn to the refs to see who won, only to discover there’s no way to score the fight. Post-debate commentary doesn’t work for the same reason Spin Alley isn’t insightful — it’s dominated by partisans cheerleading their favorite candidate. But prediction markets have a way of ferreting out people’s real beliefs, because they back those beliefs with their own money.


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/28/upshot/prediction-markets-score-it-a-rout-clinton-over-trump.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fupshot&action=click&contentCollection=upshot&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront

[Gothmog]

1. The smart money and the free market system believes that Hillary Clinton will be the next POTUS

[Tom Rinaldo]

2. Hillary was strong, sharp and focused for the entire debate

That was the invisible bar Clinton had to get over. Right there, by itself, she won. Her numbers started collapsing when she did on 911. Hillary needed to give the public a new positive close up of her in action to replace that image, and she aced it.