The Election Prognosticators: Experts vs. the Crowd
There are two approaches to election prognostications. One is talked about ad infinitum as the election date approaches. The other is almost never mentioned, because it is not run by the media. The former group include the pollsters — the Gallups, Wall Street Journal, all legacy media outlets etc. — grand seers that predicate their results (and their paychecks) on statistics (data) that are at the heart of probability theory. Operating with a herd mentality at their toil — no one seems to want to climb out on that limb and run the risk of being wrong in their calculations (Hillary, 2016, remember?) — which of course brings us back to their paychecks.
Given our two options … which one would you choose for accuracy, reliability, and honesty?
That other group of fortune tellers are the “oddsmakers.” Their forecasting is not driven by polls. Rather, they listen to what people actually believe about who is more likely to win and are willing to put their money (their “paychecks”) at risk in doing so. No one calls and asks them what they think about this “elephant” or that “donkey (some prefer ‘jackass’).”
No, it is the ones with the paycheck who call the oddsmakers and ultimately wager with their own money who they actually believe will win, not who they hope will. And they do this because they know there is no hype, spin, manipulation or agenda involved — just the odds which are derived from the preferred choices of those willing to wager their own money on — either this “elephant” or that “donkey.”
The moment for choices is rapidly approaching. What is interesting is that if you compare these two camps of prognosticators, they yield vastly different results. Just remember, one is based on what someone wants to happen (with little at risk except perhaps their pride) and the other is a function of what an enormous number of people believe will happen — and are willing to risk hard earned money to underwrite their choice. It’s the specific knowledge of the “experts” against the cumulative knowledge of the crowd.
The Election and the Pollsters
The headline reads “US election ‘too close to call’ in swing states — Wall Street Journal poll.”
According to the “probability gurus” at the Journal, Donald Trump and Kamala Harris are locked in a dead heat in all seven of the battleground states that will decide the outcome of next month’s presidential election.
Sampling 4,200 voters (“registered” voters, not “likely” voters), the poll found Harris with an “oh-so-slight” lead over Trump in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin, and Trump holding a slim advantage in Nevada, North Carolina and Pennsylvania.
The Journal noted, however, that no lead is wider than two percentage points, except in Nevada, where Trump leads by five points.
Across all seven swing states, Trump leads Harris by 46 percent to 45 percent, the poll found. Republicans and Democrats alike support their respective candidates, with independents preferring Harris to Trump (40 percent to 39 percent).
Voters surveyed by the Journal ranked the economy and immigration as their top two issues of concern. They favored Trump on economic issues by 10 points, immigration and border security by 16, while Harris beats Trump on the issue of abortion by 16 points.
Let us not forget — these are the same “political experts” who had Hillary Clinton with an 85 percent chance of in 2016 against the former president.
The Election and the Oddsmakers
But then there is that other approach to prognostication – the one based on choices of the public driven by their own risk assessment denominated in dollars. Though they headlines are fewer, they tell the story.
From an October 15 New York Times headline, “Prediction Markets Tell a Different Story From the Polls.”
And this recently from Business Insider, “The Trump trade is back on as betting markets swing in favor of a win for the former president.”
Both U.S. and international betting markets shifted this weekend towards a Trump victory, with prediction sites such as BetOnline, Polymarket, PredictIt, and Kalshi all predicting Trump’s presidential chances are stronger than the incumbent V.P.
In case you hadn’t noticed — stemming from the vice president’s deafening silence refusing to give unassisted interviews (ala CBS) — some continue to take her seriously. How is this possible?
As of this date — October 18 — according to an average of betting odds by news website and data aggregator RealClearPolitics, oddsmakers give the Republican nominee a 58.5 percent chance of winning, and Harris a 40.4 percent chance.
The Republican nominee took a particularly sharp lead October 14 with oddsmakers BetOnline (140-120), Bet365 (138-110) and Bovada (135-115).
Bet365 posts its latest — October 18 — U.S. presidential election odds showing Trump with (163) a 61.9 percent implied probability to win the election over Harris’s (130) a 43.4 percent chance.
The blockchain-based election betting site Polymarket priced in — October 18 — a 60 percent chance of a Trump victory, breaking the 60 percent threshold for the first time since late July, days after President Joe Biden bowed out of the race.
Today, after three assassination attempts and an opponent with no platform other than a failed Biden agenda and “abortion advocacy,” the election still remains Trump’s to lose.
Given our two options regarding prognostications for the upcoming November election and what drives the results, which one would you choose for accuracy, reliability, and honesty? The one with the spin based on hope (and utter contempt for the other candidate) or the one where someone’s “paycheck” is at risk?
The latter really do not care whether they like or dislike the other candidate — their only interest is in who is likely to win — and they are willing to “put their money where their mouth is.”
READ MORE from F. Andrew Wolf Jr.:
Tolerance Is Just One of Many Important Virtues
Kennedy Endorses Trump, Media Endorses Kamala
The post The Election Prognosticators: Experts vs. the Crowd appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.