• ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    81
    ·
    5 months ago

    With billions of dollars potentially at stake and Trump currently at 60% to win the election, I’d be trying to get on these guys’ good side too.

    • Hegar@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      55
      ·
      5 months ago

      Zuck has had staunch republican assets on the board and at the highest levels of the company for ages. They’ve boosted fascist content and pushed outright lies on behalf of trump for almost 10 years now.

      FB doesn’t need to get on the good side of the far right, they’re already on the same side.

    • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      60% of what? No poll puts him at that level.

      You the guy who thinks betting websites decide elections?

      • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Betting odds are like, the most accurate way to determine outcome? Even for sports.

        If polls were accurate, anyone with a bit of risk tolerance could make bank betting against Trump. But people doing stats in swing states, campaign finances, etc seem to be in alignment (again, if they weren’t in alignment, there would be money to be made)

        • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          From my reading, these betting markets have recently tracked as well as 538 long term, so that’s a decent outcome. I wonder if they just swing to vendors like 538 to look for “an inside track” to bet against overall, but it’s a small system so it’s not clear.

          The issues they have are being largely illegal or grey market in the US, which limits who will interact with them. There very well could be experts who could “make money” that won’t do so because of their current status.

          They also appear to be very erratic in the short term, the same way a lot of sports betting and stock gambling is. Single events can send the numbers into tailspins. We’ve had some pretty intense recent events, so I’m not exactly confident in their choices.

          I’d say lastly that they are heavily right wing or right wing adjacent spaces. Some people are just there to make money, but others are tossing it away on ideology, especially in these divisive times. Markets aren’t always rational actors, they just tend to be in aggregate.

        • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          26
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          So yes, you think gamblers decide elections.

          I think I asked you this last time you brought this up and you didn’t reply. What were Biden’s odds of winning in 2020 on these same websites at 3 months out?

          • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            18
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Obviously gamblers don’t decide elections but they do a pretty good job predicting election outcomes.

            I don’t think I’m the same guy you had that discussion with (or if I am, I have no memory of it). Anyway, Polymarket (which I trust more) appears to have no history for resolved markets (as far as I can tell) and PredictIt (which is currently more optimistic about Harris than Polymarket) only shows 9/20/20 at the earliest (at which time it was Biden 57, Trump 46, Harris 4). I’m not sure what you’re getting at with this question.

            Note: Yes, PredictIt didn’t add up to 100%. In theory that means you could have made money off of it risk-free but in practice it has a lot of overhead which prevents it from being an efficient market.

    • EnderWiggin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      at 60% to win the election

      LOL what? There is barely any polling out on Harris v. Trump, and the one’s that have circulated are a dead heat at +/-2 in either direction. I’m personally waiting on Nate Silver’s first real forecast tomorrow.

      • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        His odds are about the same as Polymarket’s.

        (Sorry Nate, I know this is paywalled but winning an argument is more important than your livelihood.)

        • EnderWiggin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Hey fair enough. That’s pretty shocking. Looks like I’m throwing some money down on this one. I think these odds are insane, and I’ll gladly take them.

          Edit: So far that money is looking well spent. As expected, the odds have completely flipped.

          • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            I think the original predictions were accurate given the information available at the time, but Harris has been unexpectedly successful. I am pleasant surprised.