USA és a világ

nagyon remélem, hogy a kintiek nem olvasnak origot, mert szerintük ha nem Trump nyer kitörhet a 3. vh
ezzel itthon simán lehetett nyerni 😊

Azért Trump szellemi holdudvara/rajongótábora nagyot megy így zárásként, Farage, Carlson egymást múlják felül.
somoskovig

Épp pár napja dicsértem a Trump kampányt, hogy jól el tudták dugni JD-t is, azért az utolsó napra még sikerült kioltania (az amúgy már elterelődött, ugye Trump alig tudott beszállni a teherautóba, és a legacy media egy idő után inkább ezzel foglalkozott, mint az eredeti üzenettel) garbage témát, miután szemétnek (thrash) nevezete Harrist. Ez biztos jól működik az amúgy is sikeresen megszólított női szavazóknál.

JD Vanceről majd írok egy hosszabbat (ha nyernek azért, ha veszítenek azért), ő nekem egy kicsit Rogán Antal figura: elképesztően jól helyezkedik, mozog, jól kufárkodik a befolyással, de szörnyű public figure.

Azért Trump szellemi holdudvara/rajongótábora nagyot megy így zárásként, Farage, Carlson egymást múlják felül.

Polymarketen kivul is igy allnak a fogadoirodak:

 www.reviewjournal.com/sports/betting/betting-favorite-gets-bump-on-eve-of-u-s-presidential-election-3206347/
undisputedly

Ez meg már herding. Egyszerűen a legnagyobbat követik.

Ugye volt egy francia személy, aki 3x15 millió USD-t tett Trumpra, és ugye egy bálna el tudja téríteni a piacot. Ugye sok profi sportfogadó ezért kerüli a 50-50-es sportokat (box, UFC), és inkább a polarizált piacokon keresnek pénzt (major sportok), mert ott nagyobb a margin lehetőség a különböző irodák között, míg a kétszereplős fogadásoknál a piacok jobban összetartanak.

Par nap mulva, amikor biztos lesz a gyoztes, remelem szuletnek majd cikkek arrol, hogy a pollok (tobbseg D gyozelmet josol) es a fogadasi platformok (tobbseg R gyozelmet) miert latjak ellentetesen a versenyt.
undisputedly

Rövid válasz: többen fogadnak Trumpra.

Hosszú válasz: Silver írt erről (kevés idegesítőbb dolog van a Substackről kimásolásnak, szóval szívesen, ábrák hiányoznak, most nincs időm egyesével kifotózni őket, de beleírtam hogy minek kéne ott lennie):

I’ve always loved the word “doldrums” since I first encountered it as a kid reading The Phantom Tollbooth. In meteorology, the term refers to the Intertropical Converge Zone, a region near the Equator where prevailing winds battle to a draw, producing calm and monotonous weather. But the word's etymology precedes that usage, instead describing a state where you feel “down in the dumps” or even a little cranky out of boredom:

by 1803, "low spirits, the blues, the dumps," colloquial, probably from dulled, past participle of dull (v.) in the sense of "make (someone) slow-witted," with ending perhaps patterned on tantrum.

Well, we’ve entered the doldrums of the presidential campaign.

This summer produced rapid-fire action: Joe Biden dropping out amidst a massive amount of intraparty pressure, an assassination attempt (and later a second one) against Donald Trump, two debates, and the VP picks. But now, there isn’t any of that structure. After last week’s VP debate, no more major events are scheduled between now and November 5.

That doesn’t mean there isn’t news — there’s a lot, actually, between hurricanes and strikes and the continued escalation of hostilities in the Middle East. However, the political implications of this news aren’t so obvious.1 Most people don’t vote based on foreign policy, for instance.

Meanwhile, the polling has also been rudderless — and there hasn’t been much of it lately. (We didn’t even run a model update on Sunday because no new polls met our standards.) Following her debate with Trump, Harris expanded her national lead from roughly 2 points to 3 points, and it’s remained there pretty much ever since. That extra point is useful on the margin since it might be just enough to help Harris overcome the Electoral College bias — but the race remains a toss-up for all intents and purposes.

ITT VAN EGY ÁBRA, AMI AZ POPULARITY VOTE-T MUTATJA IDŐSOROSAN

And what will the final four weeks of the campaign look like? Well, maybe pretty much the same as this.

For our model, we calculate two types of error distributions for our popular vote forecast. (The error structure for our Electoral College forecast is quite a bit more complicated, but leave that aside for now.) First, there’s a parameter we call “drift”, which is essentially how much we expect the polls to shift between now and Election Day. Then there’s what we call “error” proper — basically, how wrong we expect the polls to be, as drawn from an empirical distribution of polling accuracy in all presidential elections since 1936. The thing is, we’re at the point where error is quite a bit bigger than drift. In other words, most of the uncertainty in the race now reflects the possibility of a polling error — not the chance that things will dramatically change between now and Nov. 5.2

Where do you see a little bit more movement? In prediction markets. At Polymarket, where I serve as an advisor, Trump’s odds are up to 53.6 percent, reversing a small Harris lead from a week ago.


This is a larger swing than is justified by the models:

ITT VAN EGY ÁBRA, AMIN AZ GYŐZELMI ESÉLYEKET MUTATJA IDŐSOROSAN, DE ITT MÉG HARRIS VEZET 54-45-RE

A couple of people have asked me what’s behind this, and my theory is that there isn’t much. Sometimes market sentiment has a mind of its own, and that can especially happen when traders are bored and angsty because they’re in the doldrums. Think of the various booms and busts that happened during the pandemic, for instance.

And what you can also see is a circular thought process. Someone (say Elon Musk) tweets about Trump gaining ground at Polymarket. On a slow news day, that becomes news, and people just let their imaginations run wild. People assume there must be something there, that somebody knows something, but usually it’s just a Rich Guy With Opinions.

But if Trump is overpriced, shouldn’t people aggressively bet on Harris to knock the price back into shape? Well, that’s the theory, anyway, and some people undoubtedly are doing that. But as I describe in my book, for certain types of major events like the Super Bowl, there’s so much recreational money that there’s often not enough sharp money to take it all off the table. A single whale with bottomless pockets can feed a market for years. Meanwhile, sharp bettors have a limited capacity for risk. If Harris’s “true” odds are 55 percent and you can buy her at 46, that’s a pretty good bet — but you’ll still lose it almost half the time. A half-Kelly wager would be about 9 percent of your bankroll. So say you want to consume about $50,000 of action from Trump whales? Well, in principle, you need a bankroll of $550,000 for that, and most people don’t.

And there are asymmetries in who trades at these markets and the political moods they strike. In the Trump era, Republicans tend to project confidence, while Democrats tend to project anxiety. A few weeks ago, when we had Trump slightly ahead instead of Harris in the model, both campaigns were citing the Silver Bulletin forecast: Trump to brag, Harris because she thought invoking mild panic would be an effective fundraising tool for Democrats. Plus, Polymarket traders are a crypto-adjacent crowd, which has become more Trumpy lately.3

Could people deliberately try to affect public perceptions by betting on these markets? It apparently happened before in 2008 at Intrade, but that’s less likely now since these markets are much more liquid — it costs a lot more to maintain the “wrong” price. My experience is that there are mostly just a lot of true believers — have you heard that Trump has some extremely enthusiastic fans? — plus maybe a few technical traders who are trying to time the market. In 2020, people were even betting on Trump after Trump had already lost! It’s also unclear exactly what these efforts would accomplish. As I wrote above, the Harris campaign seems to think it’s helpful when people think she’s losing. Still, the good thing about prediction markets is that at least you pay a price for being wrong, which certainly isn’t true on, for instance, Twitter.

LÁBJEGYZETEK
1
Although because of the potential impact on the economy, it would have been bad for Kamala Harris if the port strike hadn’t been resolved.

2
To get more specific about this, our model estimates that one standard deviation of “drift” equals 1.4 percentage points in the margin separating Harris from Trump. Currently, Harris leads by 2.7 points in our popular vote forecast. One standard deviation means that roughly two-thirds of the time, we’ll expect Harris to lead by between 1.3 percentage points and 4.1 points in our popular vote forecast on the morning of the election.

3
There’s a gap between Polymarket and other prediction markets, in fact, but it may be hard to arbitrage between different markets that have different barriers to entry (Polymarket isn’t open to US traders, for instance).
Gyurma Pappa

Koszi, tehat egy sorban: az alulinformaltak ontik a penzt a polymarketre, plusz "szubkultura" fogad inkabb. Ez viszont csak a polymarketet magyarazza, illetve azt sem rendezi, hogy ha ennyire nagy nyereseget lehet realizalni Harrisen, mert felre van odds-olva, miert nem repulnek ra sokan. Persze, irja, hogy egy racionalis fogadonak nagyobb bankroll kell a fogadashoz, mert igy is "50-50".

Polymarketen kivul is igy allnak a fogadoirodak:

 www.reviewjournal.com/sports/betting/betting-favorite-gets-bump-on-eve-of-u-s-presidential-election-3206347/

Szerkesztette: undisputedly

Par nap mulva, amikor biztos lesz a gyoztes, remelem szuletnek majd cikkek arrol, hogy a pollok (tobbseg D gyozelmet josol) es a fogadasi platformok (tobbseg R gyozelmet) miert latjak ellentetesen a versenyt.
undisputedly

Rövid válasz: többen fogadnak Trumpra.

Hosszú válasz: Silver írt erről (kevés idegesítőbb dolog van a Substackről kimásolásnak, szóval szívesen, ábrák hiányoznak, most nincs időm egyesével kifotózni őket, de beleírtam hogy minek kéne ott lennie):

I’ve always loved the word “doldrums” since I first encountered it as a kid reading The Phantom Tollbooth. In meteorology, the term refers to the Intertropical Converge Zone, a region near the Equator where prevailing winds battle to a draw, producing calm and monotonous weather. But the word's etymology precedes that usage, instead describing a state where you feel “down in the dumps” or even a little cranky out of boredom:

by 1803, "low spirits, the blues, the dumps," colloquial, probably from dulled, past participle of dull (v.) in the sense of "make (someone) slow-witted," with ending perhaps patterned on tantrum.

Well, we’ve entered the doldrums of the presidential campaign.

This summer produced rapid-fire action: Joe Biden dropping out amidst a massive amount of intraparty pressure, an assassination attempt (and later a second one) against Donald Trump, two debates, and the VP picks. But now, there isn’t any of that structure. After last week’s VP debate, no more major events are scheduled between now and November 5.

That doesn’t mean there isn’t news — there’s a lot, actually, between hurricanes and strikes and the continued escalation of hostilities in the Middle East. However, the political implications of this news aren’t so obvious.1 Most people don’t vote based on foreign policy, for instance.

Meanwhile, the polling has also been rudderless — and there hasn’t been much of it lately. (We didn’t even run a model update on Sunday because no new polls met our standards.) Following her debate with Trump, Harris expanded her national lead from roughly 2 points to 3 points, and it’s remained there pretty much ever since. That extra point is useful on the margin since it might be just enough to help Harris overcome the Electoral College bias — but the race remains a toss-up for all intents and purposes.

ITT VAN EGY ÁBRA, AMI AZ POPULARITY VOTE-T MUTATJA IDŐSOROSAN

And what will the final four weeks of the campaign look like? Well, maybe pretty much the same as this.

For our model, we calculate two types of error distributions for our popular vote forecast. (The error structure for our Electoral College forecast is quite a bit more complicated, but leave that aside for now.) First, there’s a parameter we call “drift”, which is essentially how much we expect the polls to shift between now and Election Day. Then there’s what we call “error” proper — basically, how wrong we expect the polls to be, as drawn from an empirical distribution of polling accuracy in all presidential elections since 1936. The thing is, we’re at the point where error is quite a bit bigger than drift. In other words, most of the uncertainty in the race now reflects the possibility of a polling error — not the chance that things will dramatically change between now and Nov. 5.2

Where do you see a little bit more movement? In prediction markets. At Polymarket, where I serve as an advisor, Trump’s odds are up to 53.6 percent, reversing a small Harris lead from a week ago.


This is a larger swing than is justified by the models:

ITT VAN EGY ÁBRA, AMIN AZ GYŐZELMI ESÉLYEKET MUTATJA IDŐSOROSAN, DE ITT MÉG HARRIS VEZET 54-45-RE

A couple of people have asked me what’s behind this, and my theory is that there isn’t much. Sometimes market sentiment has a mind of its own, and that can especially happen when traders are bored and angsty because they’re in the doldrums. Think of the various booms and busts that happened during the pandemic, for instance.

And what you can also see is a circular thought process. Someone (say Elon Musk) tweets about Trump gaining ground at Polymarket. On a slow news day, that becomes news, and people just let their imaginations run wild. People assume there must be something there, that somebody knows something, but usually it’s just a Rich Guy With Opinions.

But if Trump is overpriced, shouldn’t people aggressively bet on Harris to knock the price back into shape? Well, that’s the theory, anyway, and some people undoubtedly are doing that. But as I describe in my book, for certain types of major events like the Super Bowl, there’s so much recreational money that there’s often not enough sharp money to take it all off the table. A single whale with bottomless pockets can feed a market for years. Meanwhile, sharp bettors have a limited capacity for risk. If Harris’s “true” odds are 55 percent and you can buy her at 46, that’s a pretty good bet — but you’ll still lose it almost half the time. A half-Kelly wager would be about 9 percent of your bankroll. So say you want to consume about $50,000 of action from Trump whales? Well, in principle, you need a bankroll of $550,000 for that, and most people don’t.

And there are asymmetries in who trades at these markets and the political moods they strike. In the Trump era, Republicans tend to project confidence, while Democrats tend to project anxiety. A few weeks ago, when we had Trump slightly ahead instead of Harris in the model, both campaigns were citing the Silver Bulletin forecast: Trump to brag, Harris because she thought invoking mild panic would be an effective fundraising tool for Democrats. Plus, Polymarket traders are a crypto-adjacent crowd, which has become more Trumpy lately.3

Could people deliberately try to affect public perceptions by betting on these markets? It apparently happened before in 2008 at Intrade, but that’s less likely now since these markets are much more liquid — it costs a lot more to maintain the “wrong” price. My experience is that there are mostly just a lot of true believers — have you heard that Trump has some extremely enthusiastic fans? — plus maybe a few technical traders who are trying to time the market. In 2020, people were even betting on Trump after Trump had already lost! It’s also unclear exactly what these efforts would accomplish. As I wrote above, the Harris campaign seems to think it’s helpful when people think she’s losing. Still, the good thing about prediction markets is that at least you pay a price for being wrong, which certainly isn’t true on, for instance, Twitter.

LÁBJEGYZETEK
1
Although because of the potential impact on the economy, it would have been bad for Kamala Harris if the port strike hadn’t been resolved.

2
To get more specific about this, our model estimates that one standard deviation of “drift” equals 1.4 percentage points in the margin separating Harris from Trump. Currently, Harris leads by 2.7 points in our popular vote forecast. One standard deviation means that roughly two-thirds of the time, we’ll expect Harris to lead by between 1.3 percentage points and 4.1 points in our popular vote forecast on the morning of the election.

3
There’s a gap between Polymarket and other prediction markets, in fact, but it may be hard to arbitrage between different markets that have different barriers to entry (Polymarket isn’t open to US traders, for instance).

Szerkesztette: Gyurma Pappa

Par nap mulva, amikor biztos lesz a gyoztes, remelem szuletnek majd cikkek arrol, hogy a pollok (tobbseg D gyozelmet josol) es a fogadasi platformok (tobbseg R gyozelmet) miert latjak ellentetesen a versenyt.
undisputedly

ez amugy erdekes, de a fogadasi platformok olyan plusz dolgokat is figyelembe vesznek az oddsok kialakitasanal, aminek semmi koze nincs a tenyleges eselyekhez.

Par nap mulva, amikor biztos lesz a gyoztes, remelem szuletnek majd cikkek arrol, hogy a pollok (tobbseg D gyozelmet josol) es a fogadasi platformok (tobbseg R gyozelmet) miert latjak ellentetesen a versenyt.

Trump vagy Kamala
Kamala vagy Trump
az itt a kérdés

Shakespeare után szabadon
ThundersNFL a Paraszt

a fenét

Majka vagy Szabolcs
Szabolcs vagy Majka

Buci után szabadon
zinedine5

jöjjenek azok a fantomképek!!!

Trump vagy Kamala
Kamala vagy Trump
az itt a kérdés

Shakespeare után szabadon
ThundersNFL a Paraszt

a fenét

Majka vagy Szabolcs
Szabolcs vagy Majka

Buci után szabadon

Trump vagy Kamala
Kamala vagy Trump
az itt a kérdés

Shakespeare után szabadon

Holnap kiderül, hogy a macsó férfi energiák vagy a női energiák vannak-e előnyben a szavazók között az USA-ban, igazából erre egyszerűsödött le ez a választás.
Gyurma Pappa

vagy a macso ferfi energiak, ahol a ferfiak titokban szavaznak Kamalara 😊 jol elsult az a reklam is. nekem tetszett.
csebi

Azon nagyot röhögtem én is 😊
MC12

Az a reklámpáros TÖKÉLETES. Egy kutatás szerint működik is, 33%-a a nőknek nem mondta meg otthon hogy valójában kire szavazatott, és nem nehéz összerakni a képet...

Holnap kiderül, hogy a macsó férfi energiák vagy a női energiák vannak-e előnyben a szavazók között az USA-ban, igazából erre egyszerűsödött le ez a választás.
Gyurma Pappa

Kb mikortól várhatóak eredmények?

Holnap kiderül, hogy a macsó férfi energiák vagy a női energiák vannak-e előnyben a szavazók között az USA-ban, igazából erre egyszerűsödött le ez a választás.
Gyurma Pappa

vagy a macso ferfi energiak, ahol a ferfiak titokban szavaznak Kamalara 😊 jol elsult az a reklam is. nekem tetszett.
csebi

Azon nagyot röhögtem én is 😊

Holnap kiderül, hogy a macsó férfi energiák vagy a női energiák vannak-e előnyben a szavazók között az USA-ban, igazából erre egyszerűsödött le ez a választás.
Gyurma Pappa

Mivel mindannyiunk szereti, ha otthon szent a béke, simán nyer Kamala 😊
#papucs #effekt
Dzsokijuing

majd a no fault divorce eltörlése után tudják a nők hogy hol a helyük

Holnap kiderül, hogy a macsó férfi energiák vagy a női energiák vannak-e előnyben a szavazók között az USA-ban, igazából erre egyszerűsödött le ez a választás.
Gyurma Pappa

Mivel mindannyiunk szereti, ha otthon szent a béke, simán nyer Kamala 😊
#papucs #effekt

Holnap kiderül, hogy a macsó férfi energiák vagy a női energiák vannak-e előnyben a szavazók között az USA-ban, igazából erre egyszerűsödött le ez a választás.
Gyurma Pappa

vagy a macso ferfi energiak, ahol a ferfiak titokban szavaznak Kamalara 😊 jol elsult az a reklam is. nekem tetszett.

Holnap kiderül, hogy a macsó férfi energiák vagy a női energiák vannak-e előnyben a szavazók között az USA-ban, igazából erre egyszerűsödött le ez a választás.

gabokocka

Ha Wisconsin fordítva voksol, akkor döntetlen

Nyert a Commanders, úgyhogy Kamala az új elnök 😊
Stoki

én láttam az m1-en, hogy a 7 billegőből 5-ben Trump vezet 😊
NB2

Mondjuk abból, hogy Viktor szerint a "demokraták mennek, republikánusok jönnek, ismét Donald Trump lesz az elnök", sima Harris győzelmet tippelnék.
zinedine5

Egyszer bejött neki, igaz sokra nem mentünk azzal se

Nyert a Commanders, úgyhogy Kamala az új elnök 😊
Stoki

én láttam az m1-en, hogy a 7 billegőből 5-ben Trump vezet 😊
NB2

Mondjuk abból, hogy Viktor szerint a "demokraták mennek, republikánusok jönnek, ismét Donald Trump lesz az elnök", sima Harris győzelmet tippelnék.

Nyert a Commanders, úgyhogy Kamala az új elnök 😊
Stoki

én láttam az m1-en, hogy a 7 billegőből 5-ben Trump vezet 😊

Alig várom hogy jövő héten már nézhető legyen az NBA és NFL mer a faszom a politikai hirdetésekbe
Negritis, a vajda

Nyugi, utána jön a black friday és a karácsony őrület

Nyert a Commanders, úgyhogy Kamala az új elnök 😊
Stoki

Miről maradtam le? 😊