How accurate are prediction markets in US elections?
Topic: Marketing research article pdf
June 20, 2019 / By Edwina Question:
Like intrade for example in terms of prediction how US elections go? Historically how accurate do they turn out to be? I notice Rasmussen is using them to help predict how the Electoral College will go.
Am not talking about polls I'm talking about prediction markets based on probability.
Best Answers: How accurate are prediction markets in US elections?
Charley | 3 days ago
The March 2008 issue of Scientific American has an article about this titled "When Markets Beat The Polls":
Here is a quote: "professors [compare] the performance of the [Iowa prediction market] as a predictor of presidential elections from 1988 to 2004 with 964 polls over that same period and [show] that the market was closer to the outcome of an election 74 percent of the time."
You can read a draft of the full article here:
More anecdotal evidence: the favorite on the intrade prediction market won every US state in 2004 and every US Senate election in 2006.
There is a large amount of academic research on prediction markets. You might start with this survey paper:
Or follow some of the links here:
👍 114 | 👎 3
Did you like the answer? How accurate are prediction markets in US elections?
Share with your friends
We found more questions related to the topic: Marketing research article pdf
I once heard that 95 % of all predictions are made up on the spot. They are mostly based on a small percentage of the total popuplaton. You can get the prediction outcome that you want by asking the segement of the population the questions you know they will give you the answers you want to hear. It sort of like Family Fued. "We asked 100 Hillary supporters who they think will be the next president. The top four answers are...." You would be suprised to know how few people are questioned about your TV viewing habits.
👍 40 | 👎 -3
don' t pay attention to that stuff at the end of the day, the polls aren't as accurate because this is such a moment in history. I don't listen to polls anyway b/c say a poll is on a tv channels website what's the chance of everyone going to that website and then you have to factor does everyone now know how to get on the internet let alone vote so
i wouldn't pay attention besides polls sometimes can be taken inaccurately
👍 38 | 👎 -9
Not 100% sure but I think they all had predicted Kerry to win in 2004 initially. At least earlier on.
👍 36 | 👎 -15
Originally Answered: Shouldn't would amend the constitution to allow corporations to vote in elections?
Hits the nail on the head, Hemp. Former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was up in arms today (1/26) about last week's Supreme Court "debacle" as she called it. What gets me (and you, and O'Connor) is that the simple fact that corporations are now recognized as "individuals". The points others make about rich people like Buffet, Obama's contributors and so on are entirely beside the point. The Founding Fathers must be rolling in their graves. Of course boosters will say that this is just sour grapes on O'Connor's part as she was instrumental in supporting the law was overturned. More Liberal whining now that things are as they should be. Never mind that 100 years of legislation at both State and Federal levels was razed like Sherman marching toward Georgia. In fact, when you think of it that way, painful as it may be for some what has happened is downright patriotic!
Big Brother takes on a whole new meaning. As does the expression "marrying money". But hey. Like one 'Top Contributor' explained elsewhere, The Constitution says "Congress shall pass no law abridging freedom of speech"; and went on to point out there is no mention of "Individuals". Stupid me, jumping to conclusions. Obviously the authors would have put that in the text if that's what they meant, no? Come to think of it, it does say "In God We Trust" on our currency, too. All this time I thought that was a motto. Turns out it's actually a label. My mistake again.