Give it until Tuesday or Wednesday, they’re still counting votes. Right now Becerra is first and Steyer is in third, but could catch up and make it to the general.
Do you think Steyer has significantly more than a 4% chance of coming back when the outstanding votes are counted? If so, why? Or did you just see a screenshot and your lizard brain went “Betting markets bad!”?
Your comment was based entirely in treating gambling as a way of determining the likelihood of Steyer making it to the general, I don’t particularly feel like there should need to be a justification for my opinion when that’s essentially making stuff up, lol. But since you asked, I’m basing that on the fact that around 30% of the vote remains uncounted and actual news agencies haven’t called it yet, which means they think there’s still a possibility. This used to be how we thought about election results when they were being tallied in the distant year of 2024.
It’s not just made up. People placing bets are looking at the voting histories of the precincts with outstanding votes. A 4% chance is not a ~0% chance, so they haven’t called it. But neither is it a 50% chance.
Like, there is actual statistical analysis that proves what you are trying to say. It’s literally what is weighing those bets anyway. You’re gonna get downvoted for posting gambling sites data instead of the actual math. It’s as simple as that mate.
The remaining votes are primarily from high density urban areas that are not voting Republican. So the distance is shrinking with every new dump. But the dumps are not trending in favor of Steyer enough to make up the gap if the trend continues as it is.
There are models that follow the current trend of data. There are models that weigh the trend per county based on previous voting patterns. There are models that weigh the trend based on the county and also take into account a weight based on very similar counties (similar vote distribution in previous elections) that have already been counted in this election. etc, etc. None of them have a very high probability of him making up that gap. That’s why the markets are betting the way they are.
The models being used to place bets would be the actual probstats analysis you could show to prove your point. The betting markets ARE reflecting that data. Because it is a bet based on hard math. But there is no reason to ever cite a fucking gambling website as a source. Bets are rarely based so directly on hard math.
It’s like citing an Etsy Witch for weather predictions from yesterday.
If you’re gonna post a gambling website. At the very least, have the decency to explain what I just did on why you can actually use them to see trends for this specific case. Don’t act like an asshole.
I’m not writing a paper, or “citing” a source. I’m just showing what the current betting odds are, because, as you said, they are a quick and easy snapshot of a synthesis of those other models. I assumed people understood this. You appear to understand, but then you also go on to compare betting odds to an Etsy Witch(?).
I don’t care what motivates people to downvote. I was the only one who contributed a substantive comment regarding Steyers’ actual odds of advancing, after one commenter made it sound like he still had a real chance. Whatever. Just “give it until Tuesday or Wednesday” then.
You assumed “everyone knew this” when the comment you responded to clearly didn’t?
Also, I said any Etsy Witch predicting yesterdays weather. An Etsy witch can look at what the weather results were yesterday. That’s the joke. I can’t believe I have to explain this. The analogy is that that’s what the betting markets are doing. They’re reflecting the data in this specific case. But they don’t have any meaningful addition to add apart from how much money people are willing to bet on an outcome. People with more money have STRONGER opinions on the weight of the outcome.
In the near future. Someone is going to spend a lot of money to weigh these predictions markets in favor of the outcome that they want. They will then point to that “bought” prediction market data as a reason for why “the election was stolen”. And idiots like yourself that point to this data as meaningful will have done the work in everyone’s mind enough to think “hmmm, that is weird. I was told these prediction markets are very reliable”. No one will listen to the math that doesn’t match that market prediction. They will listen to the betting markets data because they are constantly fed it as meaningful. It is not meaningful. The math is. This specific case just has the betting following the math.
You’re being an asshole AND you’re sewing unjustified confidence in the data from these websites. “Data” that can literally be changed by money.
They are when they are being shown beside polling and election results. I don’t know why people don’t get this but it’s painfully obvious what is being done here to me. I’m not sure how people keep underestimating the stupidity of the American public.
The betting markets are being treated as reliable data for predicting elections. Actually being treated as MORE reliable than polling. Wow. Amazing.
Once this is accepted in the mind of the average American. The prediction markets become a “source of truth”. This means, with enough money, this “source of truth” can literally just be bought.
In the future we’re gonna be listening to CNN say “something is very weird with these election results. This is the first time EVER that we’ve seen results that are so different from ‘the markets’.”
We have spent years listening to the conservatives lying about election results. We have spent years watching them implement voter suppression and redistricting. How are people not seeing the obvious future purpose of these “prediction markets”.
It’s to manufacture consent for stealing elections. It’s really that simple. Stop treating these markets as anything but a future means to weigh public perception with money.
When the federal government “takes over” polling stations showing “suspicious results”. They will point to the prediction markets as justification. Mark my words.
We are currently in the “these markets are really good at predicting public opinion” phase. This will quickly be changed to “these markets are really good at manipulating public opinion” once they are accepted as a “source of truth” by the American public.
Stop pointing to them as reliable. You’re doing the work for billionaires to have the public put more faith in money than actual statistics.
Sorry, in case it wasn’t clear, I do agree with you. I just didn’t want to write all that out and instead reverted to the very easy statement previously mentioned.
What’s the latest on the Governor’s race? I read Becerra surged forward due too crypto bros and righties, any truth? I was pretty supportive of Steyer
Give it until Tuesday or Wednesday, they’re still counting votes. Right now Becerra is first and Steyer is in third, but could catch up and make it to the general.
It’s not looking good.
(Becerra already resolved Yes)
Polling gamblers isn’t the same thing as polling voters 🤷♂️
True…. What’s your point?
Do you think Steyer has significantly more than a 4% chance of coming back when the outstanding votes are counted? If so, why? Or did you just see a screenshot and your lizard brain went “Betting markets bad!”?
Your comment was based entirely in treating gambling as a way of determining the likelihood of Steyer making it to the general, I don’t particularly feel like there should need to be a justification for my opinion when that’s essentially making stuff up, lol. But since you asked, I’m basing that on the fact that around 30% of the vote remains uncounted and actual news agencies haven’t called it yet, which means they think there’s still a possibility. This used to be how we thought about election results when they were being tallied in the distant year of 2024.
It’s not just made up. People placing bets are looking at the voting histories of the precincts with outstanding votes. A 4% chance is not a ~0% chance, so they haven’t called it. But neither is it a 50% chance.
Like, there is actual statistical analysis that proves what you are trying to say. It’s literally what is weighing those bets anyway. You’re gonna get downvoted for posting gambling sites data instead of the actual math. It’s as simple as that mate.
The remaining votes are primarily from high density urban areas that are not voting Republican. So the distance is shrinking with every new dump. But the dumps are not trending in favor of Steyer enough to make up the gap if the trend continues as it is.
There are models that follow the current trend of data. There are models that weigh the trend per county based on previous voting patterns. There are models that weigh the trend based on the county and also take into account a weight based on very similar counties (similar vote distribution in previous elections) that have already been counted in this election. etc, etc. None of them have a very high probability of him making up that gap. That’s why the markets are betting the way they are.
The models being used to place bets would be the actual probstats analysis you could show to prove your point. The betting markets ARE reflecting that data. Because it is a bet based on hard math. But there is no reason to ever cite a fucking gambling website as a source. Bets are rarely based so directly on hard math.
It’s like citing an Etsy Witch for weather predictions from yesterday.
If you’re gonna post a gambling website. At the very least, have the decency to explain what I just did on why you can actually use them to see trends for this specific case. Don’t act like an asshole.
I’m not writing a paper, or “citing” a source. I’m just showing what the current betting odds are, because, as you said, they are a quick and easy snapshot of a synthesis of those other models. I assumed people understood this. You appear to understand, but then you also go on to compare betting odds to an Etsy Witch(?).
I don’t care what motivates people to downvote. I was the only one who contributed a substantive comment regarding Steyers’ actual odds of advancing, after one commenter made it sound like he still had a real chance. Whatever. Just “give it until Tuesday or Wednesday” then.
You assumed “everyone knew this” when the comment you responded to clearly didn’t?
Also, I said any Etsy Witch predicting yesterdays weather. An Etsy witch can look at what the weather results were yesterday. That’s the joke. I can’t believe I have to explain this. The analogy is that that’s what the betting markets are doing. They’re reflecting the data in this specific case. But they don’t have any meaningful addition to add apart from how much money people are willing to bet on an outcome. People with more money have STRONGER opinions on the weight of the outcome.
In the near future. Someone is going to spend a lot of money to weigh these predictions markets in favor of the outcome that they want. They will then point to that “bought” prediction market data as a reason for why “the election was stolen”. And idiots like yourself that point to this data as meaningful will have done the work in everyone’s mind enough to think “hmmm, that is weird. I was told these prediction markets are very reliable”. No one will listen to the math that doesn’t match that market prediction. They will listen to the betting markets data because they are constantly fed it as meaningful. It is not meaningful. The math is. This specific case just has the betting following the math.
You’re being an asshole AND you’re sewing unjustified confidence in the data from these websites. “Data” that can literally be changed by money.
Betting markets bad!
They are when they are being shown beside polling and election results. I don’t know why people don’t get this but it’s painfully obvious what is being done here to me. I’m not sure how people keep underestimating the stupidity of the American public.
The betting markets are being treated as reliable data for predicting elections. Actually being treated as MORE reliable than polling. Wow. Amazing.
Once this is accepted in the mind of the average American. The prediction markets become a “source of truth”. This means, with enough money, this “source of truth” can literally just be bought.
In the future we’re gonna be listening to CNN say “something is very weird with these election results. This is the first time EVER that we’ve seen results that are so different from ‘the markets’.”
We have spent years listening to the conservatives lying about election results. We have spent years watching them implement voter suppression and redistricting. How are people not seeing the obvious future purpose of these “prediction markets”.
It’s to manufacture consent for stealing elections. It’s really that simple. Stop treating these markets as anything but a future means to weigh public perception with money.
When the federal government “takes over” polling stations showing “suspicious results”. They will point to the prediction markets as justification. Mark my words.
We are currently in the “these markets are really good at predicting public opinion” phase. This will quickly be changed to “these markets are really good at manipulating public opinion” once they are accepted as a “source of truth” by the American public.
Stop pointing to them as reliable. You’re doing the work for billionaires to have the public put more faith in money than actual statistics.
Sorry, in case it wasn’t clear, I do agree with you. I just didn’t want to write all that out and instead reverted to the very easy statement previously mentioned.
Agreed. They should be illegal.