Time for some update on the assessment of probabilities for the Big Ticket in '08.
At this point, I am working with a basic scenario and a few key variables--: for more in-depth analysis, see here.
If I take the odds from one of the offshore gaming sites--press@intrade.com--(I don't recommend gambling in such places, plus it's illegal (!?) for Americans to vote in this way.)--for Democrats on the nomination, they have (7/25): Clinton 47.2; Obama 38.0; Edwards 5.9; Gore 5.4; Others (by subtraction only) 3.5%. These quoted prices are supposed to conform to percentage chance, as perceived by their trading population.
Republicans, they have: Giuliani 39.0%; Thompson 32%; Romney 16.7%; Mc Cain 6.0%; Others 6.3%.
My conclusions would be: Clinton, though rising, is still cheap for the nomination (until about 60%). Clinton for the Presidency, at 29%, also looks cheap up to about 35-38%. Sell Giuliani and Romney; buy Thompson and McCain.
"Others" is an interesting bet--though I don't think it exists as such. For the Democrats, you can see it is a weak choice, whereas for the Republicans, the existence of the likes of Gingrich and Hagel out there (Jeb Bush!?) and the weakness of all the current candidates make it conceivable. Seven days ago, the same figure by subtraction works out to 4.3%, so it's gone up over 45% in a week!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
August 30: Clinton is no longer cheap at 67.7% for the nomination. For the presidency itself, she's now at 41.6%, which seems about right.
Obama has over-corrected and is down to 16.9% for the nomination, 10.9% for the Presidency itself. I'd buy Obama at these prices: he's very much in the race to win Iowa and New Hampshire, which would nullify Clinton's momentum before Florida--whenever it decides to vote.
The one that I would still look to as decisive, though, is California, and I think Obama should have a decent chance. A lot should depend on where Richardson/Edwards support goes. Obama can get it, but he has to tread a fine line.
Post a Comment