Obama Passes 50% in Intrade for First Time (aside from briefly after Iowa)

(Cross posted at BareNaked Pundits)

It's Super Tuesday, and I admit it... I'm dying for some exit polls.  

In the past, we've usually seen some start to leak before the polls closed.  Often as early as 1pm.  But as we call know, ever since the 2004 debacle, when exit polls showed Kerry winning, it's become pretty much impossible to get early ones, even crappy ones.

Apparently, there's a much tighter rein on them these days.

But if you're into reading tea leaves, then you might want to check out Intrade. For those not familiar, it's a market where you can bet on the outcome of elections. For the first time in the entire election cycle, Intrade traders are now giving Barack Obama a higher chance of winning than Hillary Clinton.  Just slightly higher -- 52.9% vs 47.9% as of 5:26 pm -- but higher nonetheless.

This switcheroo just happened about 2 hours ago.  Maybe evidence of betting by some who really did get early evidence of exit polls?  Perhaps.  Or perhaps just a coincidence.

Now, arguably, you can only put so much credence on these things, since they're still just predictive markets.  And God knows, they've been wrong in the past.  Still though, it's real people putting up real money.   And... that seems a lot more predictive to me than just the usual pontification.

[UPDATE: As enarjay rightfully pointed out, Obama was indeed up over 50% after Iowa.  Thanks, good catch!]

•  Tips

  Because let's face it -- on Super Tuesday, we're ALL obsessively reading tea leaves.

  by Hlinko on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:43:01 PM PDT

  •  FYI, I've never traded on Intrade

    Not sure how to do it, and always been too confused/lazy to figure it out, but... I do watch it obsessively.

    by Hlinko on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:45:28 PM PDT

    •  To sign up you have to send them...

      ...all kinds of personal info including a copy of your drivers license.

      I punted before I could sign up...

      by Sanuk on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:54:24 PM PDT

    •  InTrade

      InTrade is not hard to learn, and it's really fun and can be very profitable - I originally went in with $150, my account is now worth $650.  And I've done that only by betting with my heart - betting that the Democratic Party would not nominate anyone who supported the original decision to go to war with Iraq (I originally hedged my bet between all anti-war candidates).
      The hardest part is transferring your money to the website, after you figure out how to do this it's dead easy - you buy contract if you feel they are undervalued and sell them if they are overvalued

      let me know if there is anything in particular you're confused about and i'll try to explain it

      by NukularWinter on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:00:47 PM PDT

      •  Due to the anti-gambling law

        They don't accept money from banks and credit cards I thought.

        by IhateBush on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:17:21 PM PDT

  •  he was up to 70 after Iowa.

    by enarjay on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:46:20 PM PDT

    •  Good catch -- I just updated the diary

      Thanks much, I completely spaced on that

      by Hlinko on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:50:41 PM PDT

    •  Third time he takes the lead

      He very transiently - for a couple of minutes - was trading as the frontrunner in July 2007, before stabilizing a couple of points below her. Then he crashed after the Hillary campaign used his comments about Pakistan to spread the ridiculous "Obama is not experienced" meme.  He then became the frontrunner for the second time after Iowa, which obviously only lasted until New Hampshire. This is the third time he's ahead of her.

      by NukularWinter on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:53:59 PM PDT

    •  Would've been a good time to buy Clinton Futures

      Not making a political judgment - just a basic market timing principle: Buy on weakness / Sell on strength.

      Tonight might be a good time to sell your Obama position and put a bet on Clinton, while Obama is flying high. I don't know how many more movie stars endorsements he can pull out of the hat. You don't have to wait for the election to sell, just sell on the next Obama dip/Clinton rise.

      I may have to sign up and make a bet myself.

      My observation - there are an awful lot of people who bet against the Clintons over the years, and found themselves on the ground with tire tracks across their back. That was a political judgment.

      by DWSUWF on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:50:02 PM PDT

  •  NJPSE is More Fun

    It's play money, so anybody can plan. But there are prizes they give away, so people try to win.  

    http://njpse.nationaljournal.com

    Interesting items in today's trading

    Dem CA: Obama 68 +19
    Dem CA Clinton 20 -23

    Now that's really interesting to me.

    It seems to confirm your suspicions about an exit poll being leaked.

    For the record, I "bought" 170 shares of Obama CA stock on the NJPSE a few weeks ago at a much lower price. Given that their system works like commodities trading, I'll make a healthy chunk of play "money" if Obama actually wins California. But I'm not counting on it.  

    by The Bagof Health and Politics on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:52:56 PM PDT

•  When Hillary was way up on Intrade

  it was ridiculed here as merely a passive reactor to conventional wisdom. That is no longer operative, I guess.

  by Jim J on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:45:20 PM PDT

  •  Ridiculed by who?

    I never did.  

    by Hlinko on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:45:52 PM PDT

  •  Depends

    did Hlinko do the ridiculing?

    by jamfan on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:46:13 PM PDT

    •  Naw, I'm obsessed with Intrade

      by Hlinko on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:49:58 PM PDT

      •  Go to NJPSE

        http://njpse.nationaljournal.com

        All the fun without any of the risk because it's play money.

        by The Bagof Health and Politics on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:54:50 PM PDT

        •  asdf

          Doesn't that largely defeat the purpose?

          by RangerKeeper on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:01:00 PM PDT

          •  No because they give away prizes weekly

            So people actually try to win so they can get an Ipod or digital camera or whatever they're giving away that week.

            by The Bagof Health and Politics on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:04:21 PM PDT

  •  I hope someone is betting on

    "inside info" atleast what they think is inside info.....

    by nevadadem on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:46:26 PM PDT

  •  I guess the "conventional wisdom" has seen....

    Barrack's Big Mo at least for today!

    by humphrey on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:48:18 PM PDT

    •  This is true. FWIW. nt

      by Inland on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:04:30 PM PDT

  •  I only wish otto von bs was still with us

    to comment on these intrade numbers, he loved them so.

    by citizenx on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:49:57 PM PDT

  •  NJPSE has something interesting

    Remember NJPSE is play money, so who knows. But today's trading on NJPSE

    CA stock
    Obama 68 +19
    Clinton 30 -23

    Interesting.

    by The Bagof Health and Politics on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:54:13 PM PDT

  •  I still think so.

    It's a market with no particular information beyond polling.  

    by Inland on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:04:06 PM PDT

•  screen shot from intrade

  

  by darthstar on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:47:52 PM PDT

  •  Now 58 42 for Obama...

    ..4:09 pacific time.

    That is a big move...

    by elial on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 04:10:06 PM PDT

•  God, I'd love to see him pull it off

  But I'm not believing anything until the polls are closed.

  by DH from MD on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:48:27 PM PDT

•  Massachsuetts

  Early exit polls show it's a dead heat.  (Yeah, I know the link is to NRO, but they're really reliable about releasing early exit polls.)

  by Diane Chambers on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:50:42 PM PDT

  •  If MA is that close

    I think it's going to be a long night for Hillary. NJ will be the real indicator for me, though.

    by orchid314 on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:56:08 PM PDT

    •  For me

      The real indicators will be how long it takes the networks to call the states.  I still expect Clinton to won New Jersey, but if they can't call the race right away, it might be good news for Obama.  The same goes for Mass and even more so for New York.  If they don't call New York right when the polls close, its all over for Clinton.

      Other than Georgia, if Obama wins any of the states in the Eastern Time Zone, it will be a good night for him.  Most of his strength is expected in other time zones.  

      by Boston on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:03:52 PM PDT

  •  NRO

    is actually a pretty good election-night sight to follow.

    by atrexler on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:02:54 PM PDT

•  Yeah

  the fact that the movement happened two hours ago is what gives me pause. Still, I don't want to get my hopes up too much.

  by orchid314 on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:50:55 PM PDT

  •  NJPSE confirms it

    Granted it's play money, but NJPSE has CA

    Obama 67 +19
    Clinton 30 -23

    It's interesting for there to be that much movement today.

    by The Bagof Health and Politics on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:56:14 PM PDT

    •  If we take CA

      We take the nomination...but no way I'm counting on that!  I'll be satisfied with a close finish!

      by oscarsmom on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:03:05 PM PDT

      •  I'm not counting on it either

        But that's still the most I've ever seen anything move on NJPSE. And it all moved today. Yesterday, it could be explained by the Zogby poll. Today, not so much. My gut is telling me very high independent turnout in the primary, which (if the votes are counted) bodes well.

        That said, if Barack can get a tie tonight, he's in good shape. He has more money than Clinton and the mid-Atlantic primary next week sets up very well for him...

        by The Bagof Health and Politics on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:06:31 PM PDT

        •  Well I hope they fix the voting problems! :)

          by oscarsmom on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:26:00 PM PDT

•  Like Lou Rukeiser said on 'Wall Street Week'

  now let's hear from the elves ...

  by mnicholson0220 on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:51:09 PM PDT

•  Obama's intrade @ 60-65 tomorrow?

  Time will tell, but he doesn't seem to be en route to implosion tonight. Anecdotally, the consensus appears that the race looks worse for Clinton the longer it drags on.  Once we have hard numbers tonight, even 70 percent wouldn't be unreasonable.

  Damn, I wish I'd bought Obama the day after NH..LOL.

  by Ericwmr on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:56:44 PM PDT

•  Obama was within 4 percentage points yesterday

  and he's 4.9 percent higher than Hillary right now at 6:00 pm.

  52.9 Obama / 48 Clinton.

  Our... constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men's minds. Thurgood Marshall

  by bronte17 on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:56:55 PM PDT

•  Media hype. NEW HAMPSHIRE, people.

  Gawd.  It's like Charlie Brown and the football.

  by Geekesque on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 02:58:07 PM PDT

  •  Yeah

    As an Obama supporter I'd love to believe these inTrade trends, but these things aren't reliable and move all over the place.

    by itskevin on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:01:09 PM PDT

•  Darn

  Missed my chance to make major moola!  Should'a bought when he was 2-to-1 against!

  by oscarsmom on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:00:34 PM PDT

•  watch out with intrade

  I check it out often, and it is fun. But in 4 years of watching the site, it's pretty clear that it's just the most recent CW.

  My favorite was the jump from about 5-10% to 100% for "DEMS TAKE SENATE" in 2006.

  Like I said, fun, but take with a canister of salt.

  by atrexler on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:00:48 PM PDT

  •  True

    And Kerry surged after the exit polls were released in '04, only to swoon a couple hours later...

    by itskevin on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:02:14 PM PDT

•  I kicked myself in 2006 for not

  betting on the "Democratic House and Democratic Senate" option. I could have made a bundle.

  Alas, I'm not a betting man.

  by jeepdad on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:01:35 PM PDT

•  I love Intrade

  I kept an eye on McCain's odds the day Florida voted. His number started climbing before the polls closed, then rose slowly when the polls closed, but no winner was declared. Then it went past 70% when McCain was declared the winner and has climbed since.

  I wouldn't say Intrade is reactive as much as integrative. It's not reacting to just the latest news, but is the best guess of people willing to put their money at risk, without margins of error. It's not as crazy as partisans who cherry pick the poll they like best. At the same time, the numbers are far from perfect wisdom.  

  Currently McCain, Clinton and Obama are all around 33% for being elected President. Clinton is a little weaker than she should be for her strength at her number for the Democratic nomination, reflecting some opinion that she is less electable, consistent with polls, but only a little less electable. The Obama number may be the best value. After all, the real number is either 100% or 0%. Either he's the next President, or he isn't. Anyone who is confident that he's the next President can demonstrate that confidence on Intrade. Otherwise it's just words. I like that.

  by DavidCD on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:03:06 PM PDT

•  obama trades.

  i don't believe or trust intrade anymore. but since there's nothing to do for the next hour...

  intrade records show a dump of obama shares around 12:30pm this afternoon. he went down around 44.

  then a big series of buys of obama shares at 1:20pm. obama around 49.

  then an obama dump at 5:00pm. back down to 46.

  and then a obama buy around 5:30pm. up to 53.

  by Addison on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:04:13 PM PDT

  •  clinton.

    clinton shows a big fall at 1:20pm (from 54 to 50), a brief rally then another fall at 3:00pm to 50, then a tumble to 46-7 at 5:30pm.

    by Addison on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:07:35 PM PDT

•  AP: Obama winning white men

  Also:

  "HRC's margins among women smaller than other states."

  http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/

  by poblano on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:08:13 PM PDT

  •  what does "other states" mean? previous states?

    by Addison on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:09:40 PM PDT

    •  It means early primary states n/t

      As clarified by Politico:

      UPDATE: My colleague, Avi Zenilman, suggests this is the tea leaf: "Overall, Obama led among men and Clinton led among women, although her advantage among women appeared smaller than was seen in early primary states."

      by poblano on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:11:00 PM PDT

      •  depending on which primary states...

        ...and the breakdown of the data, that isn't good for hillary. at the very least there hasn't been BA news for obama so far, even if all the "news" has been bunk.

        by Addison on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:12:28 PM PDT

•  Intratrade by State

  By State:
  Hillary:
  TN 90.1
  NY 90.0
  OK 90.0
  NJ 84.0
  AR 80.0
  AZ 65.7
  MA 65.1
  NM 60.0
  DE 59.5

  Tossup
  MO 46.0 - 45.0

  Obama:
  MN 50.0
  AK 50.0
  CT 52.8
  CO 60.0
  CA 67.0
  ID 80.0
  KS 80.0
  AL 82.3
  UT 85.0
  GA 90.0
  IL 93.0

  Overall that looks pretty good for Obama. It looks like near an even split overall. I think the big one there is how strongly traders have CA leaning to Barack.

  by acerimusdux on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:10:26 PM PDT

  •  huh...

    ...i'd definitely be buying some hillary CA stock if i had some money to play with.

    by Addison on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:11:34 PM PDT

    •  Yeah

      I wouldn't put too much faith in the predictive power of these markets. I'd call Hillary a buy right now in CA at a price of 29.6.  In some cases these have really low volume.  I left out ND because there was no trading there so no price.

      Mostly though they do fit in with what polling and other experts seem to expect.  So Delaware, Missouri, Minnesota, and Connecticut are some of the closest states.  I'd think CA was somewhere in that group though as well.

      by acerimusdux on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:20:54 PM PDT

    •  Alabama is another one

      I think that one does favor Obama, but it should be fairly close. Hillary is a buy at 20.0.

      by acerimusdux on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:22:59 PM PDT

•  Intrade doesn't accept money from

  credit cards or US banks apparently.

  Otherwise, I want to buy Clinton.  This is very cheap.

  I think Clinton is still the overwhelming favorite, and I would like to make some dough.

  I am an Obama supporter, by the way.

  by IhateBush on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:15:50 PM PDT

•  It looks like Obama is up by a couple points

  In the exits.

  MSNBC just ran with these numbers:

  53% change
  22% experience
  14% cares about me
  9% electability

  Among the change voters, Obama led 72-25.  

  That alone gives him about 38% of the vote.  

  They didn't list the breakouts for the other issues but I'm going to use CNN's New Hampshire poll to infer it since that was the closest state so far.  

  In New Hampshire, Hillary won "experience" about 10:1, and "cares about me" by about 2:1.  Obama won electability by about 2:1.

  So putting those numbers together:

  		Obama	 Hillary    
  Change		 38	  13	    
  Experinnce	  2	  20	    
  Cares About Me	  4	  10	    
  Electability	  6	   3
  
  Total		 50	  46

  
  That's my best guess at what the exit #'s show.  

  by poblano on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:21:28 PM PDT

  •  Agreed. Do you have a state by state numbers too?

    by Ex Clinton Democrat on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:41:46 PM PDT

•  These are never right

  Remember how on election day 2004 Kerry shot up to 86% because of exit polls leaked to drudge.  You could have made some money betting bush that day.  

  by chick ghandil on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 04:04:47 PM PDT

  •  Of course he probably got the most votes...

    ..just to put my tin foil hat back on...

    by elial on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 04:12:17 PM PDT

•  Now tonight's another example

  It's an example that Intrade is volatile, but it's also an example of why I like to check it. With the early results, Hillary's odds have gone up again. Why? Because she won Massachusetts? Yet Barack has won Delaware, probably Connecticut and states he was supposed to win. He's probably doing fine as far as delegates are concerned. California will still make a difference, but it would be good to bet on Barack right now, before something else spooks the market. That's fun to know, even though I'm not interested in betting what meager money I would bet to make a meager profit.

  So what were the bets that drove Barack's numbers up? Wasn't it the surging polls? Some may have surged too far, but the trend is still the same. I don't get this from partisan words. This is human behavior that makes this volatility, not spin. I find the former much more palatable.

  by DavidCD on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 06:49:37 PM PDT

•  Now

  57 42 in Hillary's favor...7:14 pacific time

  by elial on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 07:14:47 PM PDT