[quote=jficquette]I may do it. That sounds like easy money since once the majority considers that they are on the on the wrong side they are sure to come down.
Its like when the majority was on the side of housing, or when every one was buying fertilzer stocks or when every one was buying dot.coms. They all got screwed.
They all got screwed because they were going with the crowd and overlooked fundementals.
In this case the fundementals are that Obama is a Racist, and a Marxist. Where is the value in that in a free society? No where, just like fertilizer stocks never should have gotten 30 times earnings etc but did because people saw them going up and jumped in. Same with housing. No reason for stuff to get as high as it did but it did.
John[/quote]
John, as for markets, they tend to be very accurate in the long run (e.g. the old adage: the market is a voting machine in the short run and a weighing machine in the long run, bears alot of truth). As for intrade, you could make the argument that the odds early on are skewed, but at T-1 to election, intrade appears to be very accurate. I’ve included an excerpt below from an interesting article regarding intrade’s strengths and flaws:
“Intrade has done an excellent job of predicting election results over the last few years. In 2004, President Bush won every state in which Intrade’s contracts — as of the night before Election Day — gave him a better than 50 percent chance of winning. He lost every state where the traders thought Mr. Kerry was the favorite. Late on election night in 2006, while the talking heads on CNN and MSNBC were still saying that the Republicans would hold onto the Senate, Intrade knew better.”
