politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
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.