Bye-bye to the bounce?

Posted: Friday, September 05, 2008 7:26 PM by Alan Boyle

Jae C. Hong / AP

Delegates are showered with balloons after John McCain's acceptance speech
during the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minn., on Thursday.

Republican presidential candidate John McCain didn't benefit from that big of a bounce today in the post-convention prediction markets. Then again, Democratic rival Barack Obama didn't get much of a bounce from his party's convention last week, either.

In fact, the idea that political conventions produce an upward "bounce" of popularity doesn't really apply to the prediction markets, and economists think they know why.

By the way, McCain's surprise selection of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate didn't move the markets either, for different reasons.

The no-bounce campaign
Prediction markets represent an attempt to bring the dismal science of economics into the political sphere: Instead of relying on polls of representative voter samples, the markets simply provide an online method for buying and selling "stock" in various candidates of political propositions. (Similar markets have been set up for contests ranging from the Super Bowl to the Oscars race, by the way).

The Iowa Electronic Markets have offered real-money trading in political futures since the Bush-Dukakis campaign of 1988. Over the past 20 years, the IEM has been at least as accurate as political polls when it comes to picking the winners.

Here's how the system works: If you think McCain will win, based on his showing at this week's convention, you could plunk down up to $500 to buy shares that fluctuate based on his fortunes. The shares pay off at $1 each if McCain wins in November, but become worthless if he loses.

As of 5 p.m. ET today, McCain's shares were trading at 41.3 cents, which means the traders' consensus view is that McCain has a 41.3 percent chance of beating Obama. On the other hand, Obama's shares were valued at 59 cents - meaning that the Democrat is still the strong favorite, at least as far as the market is concerned.

The funny thing is that those values on the IEM have been basically unchanged (with one exception, detailed below) since Aug. 25, the day the Democratic convention opened. That runs counter to the conventional (heh, heh) wisdom that candidates enjoy a surge of popularity after their turn in the national spotlight.

"If you look at the prediction markets, it's been the most boring two weeks of the campaign," said Justin Wolfers, an economist at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School who has studied the dynamics of such markets for years.

This year isn't unusual in that respect. The IEM has never seen a post-convention bounce in the 20 years that it's been gathering statistics, said Tom Snee, a spokesman for the University of Iowa's Tippie College of Business.

"We speculate that's because the people on the IEM are really into politics, and they can see through a lot of the rhetoric and the stagecraft," Snee told me. "They look for substance - and there's not a lot of substance anymore at these things."

Obama's stock actually saw a significant but short-lived dip during the Democratic convention. That left the IEM's economists scratching their heads, but they did find that the dip correlated rumblings that Hillary Clinton's supporters might rebel against the presumed nominee. (Here's a pre-convention report that hinted as much.) Once Clinton gave her strong support to Obama, the downward plunge was reversed.

On InTrade's prediction market, there has been more of a bounce: Obama's shares have moved up and down, going from a little more than 58 cents on Aug. 23 to almost 62 cents on Wednesday, then dropping to today's closing price of 55.5 cents. As you'd expect, McCain's trend line went down (to 36 cents last week), then up (to 43 cents today). But in the grand scheme of things, not much has changed.

Wolfers' hunch is that traders generally discount the upward swings in the post-convention polls as being in line with expectations - just as traders on the stock market would shrug off expected good news about a company's quarterly earnings. "We think that financial markets are forward-looking in a way that political polls are not," he told me.

Standing pat on Palin
The current price stability doesn't mean the traders are frozen in place. So if the conventions' glare doesn't move the market much, what does?

"News," Snee answered. "News is really the big thing that moves it."

He pointed to the example of fallen Democratic hopeful John Edwards: When word got out that his wife had cancer, his shares fell from 7 cents to 2 cents. And when he announced that he wasn't quitting the race because of it, the shares rose to 11 cents - but then eventually settled back to 7 cents. Of course, now his shares aren't worth the paper they weren't printed on.

So wouldn't you think Palin's debut as McCain's vice-presidential pick would shake up the market? Neither her surprise selection, nor the reports about her political baggage, nor her raucously received convention speech made any difference in the GOP price levels.

"Apparently the traders didn't think it would help or hurt," Snee said.

Wolfers noted that there were wild swings last week in the prediction markets for GOP vice-presidential candidates (would it be Tim Pawlenty? Mitt Romney? Tom Ridge? Sarah Palin?!), but those swings had zero impact on the presidential prognosis.

"I think the most obvious inference from this is that no one thinks the VP matters," Wolfers said.

(After the Palin pick was announced, InTrade set up shares for "investing" in the chance that she'd be withdrawn as the GOP vice-presidential nominee. A couple of days ago, the stock was trading as high as 19 cents, but today it was in the 7-cent range.)

Maybe it's time to wave bye-bye to the bounce: Even political insiders are focusing less on the post-convention poll numbers and more on the complex perceptions hidden within those numbers - perceptions that could eventually affect political strategies as well as the marketplace.

The interpretation of those polls over the coming days could well make a difference, even in the prediction markets. "It's absolutely possible for the wonks who are trading to not be able to read Joe Six-Pack," Wolfers said.

Unless something unexpected emerges, the next big opportunity for a move in the market will come during the debates, which open with an Obama-McCain faceoff on Sept. 26. If nothing happens to change the equation, the Democrats will likely retain their market edge. But if McCain or Palin score points, watch how the traders react.

Speaking out on science
Speaking of debates, ScienceDebate 2008 is still working to shed more of the spotlight on issues that have a scientific or technological twist. We're not just talking about the outrageous price of lab helium here, but about concerns ranging from climate change to international competitiveness, from fuel cells to stem cells.

ScienceDebate 2008's organizers couldn't get the candidates together to talk about such issues during the presidential primary season, but in July they offered up 14 questions for would-be presidents to answer. (Scientists and Engineers for America have drawn up a seven-question version for congressional candidates.)

A week ago, ScienceDebate 2008 announced that Obama had sent in his answers to the questions.

"Most of America's major unsolved challenges revolve around these 14 questions," ScienceDebate2008's chief executive officer, Shawn Otto, said in a news release. "To move America forward, the next president needs a substantive plan for tackling them going in, and voters deserve to know what that plan is. We're pleased that Senator Obama has provided voters with that substantive plan, and we're hoping for similarly thoughtful responses from Senator McCain."

In his response, Obama said "ensuring that the U.S. continues to lead the world in science and technology will be a central priority for my administration."

Obama talked about expanding scholarship programs to beef up teaching resources in high-need schools; encouraging reductions in carbon emissions through a market-based, cap-and-trade system; increasing federal spending on energy research and development; boosting support for embryonic stem-cell research; and much, much more.

McCain - or members of his campaign staff - could no doubt send ScienceDebate 2008 a similarly detailed case for his science and technology policies by distilling all the statements he has already made on such issues. So why haven't they done so already?

Update for 7:30 a.m. ET Sept. 8: McCain's shares did post a 4.5-cent day-to-day uptick on the IEM in the latest trade on Sunday night, based on the daily price chart. The average price showed a 1.3-cent rise, so that would qualify as a bounce. The message to be drawn from that could be that traders saw something in the post-convention enthusiasm worth acting on. But the rise was nowhere near the kinds of jumps that were reported by traditional polls, first for Obama, and now for McCain.

As of late Sunday night, Obama's shares were valued at 56 cents, and McCain's were at 44 cents in the winner-take-all market. In the vote-share market, traders try to figure out how much of the vote the Republicans and the Democrats will get: In the day's final trade, The Democrats' projected share was 52.2, and the Republicans' share was 46.5. Because these are all separate trading propositions, the totals don't necessarily add up to 100 percent.

Check out msnbc.com's Politics section and the First Read blog for more on the presidential race.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

Who cares what the polls show. If you are making decision based on polls your most likely an idiot(my opinion). If you have been paying attention to the for the past several years you should see the trend and understand how we are being bombarded with more and more bad info from all sides. CNN's Way(D) and Foxes Opinion(R)!!!

Eron (Sent Sunday, September 07, 2008 2:09 AM)

So... I'm here lookin around and I manage to catch a few articles, blurbs, and blogs. Well, O.K. not blogs! Regarding the Science and Technology piece, I have to admit that it got me to thinkin(though not too deeply), and I was reminded of the advantages we as "the people" enjoyed during one of our country's pursuits of a modern agenda. You know, like the one where entrepreneurial and technological innovations transformed building=sized computers costing millions into desktops,laptops, and handhelds costing only hundreds. I wonder if anyone ever bothered to integrate that into a political stock pick!
The high value to low cost ratio formula that science and technology delivered in that instance is something that continues to benefit our lives today.
Seems pretty simple to me; When policies promote tremendous values that serve to lower costs(no matter if it is in health-care or alternative energies) that serves to improve our lives. And so I ask, where's the downside?
It's funny, but unless I missed it the day I went to school to keep my brother from being absent... I don't believe anybodys figured out how to make time move in reverse.
So I just have to take my encouragement from the candidate who not only sees to it that his homework was done (or at least picked up), but sees further that the future relies on the genius that Science and Technology develops.
That said, it may pay for one of our candidates to acknowledge what so many of our citizens either already know, or will soon learn in the course of their lives (and hopefully in the course of this campaign):
" Your priorities yesterday...is where you are today. Your priorities today...is where you'll be tomorrow." - Life According To Ron

D. Hayes, Quartz Hill,CA (Sent Sunday, September 07, 2008 4:45 AM)

While there may be some merit in market predictive studies, I am a firm believer that almost any number-crunching based proof for or against something can be manipulated to give the person the answer they hope to achieve. There is almost no way to remove a tester's/pollster's bias. Anyone that claims not to have a vested interest in anything is likely a liar or ignorant of the subject. To build a computational study of something for which one is ignorant would be unlikely. As soon as the individual begins to seek knowledge of something previously unknown, an opinion develops and the foundation of personal bias starts to build.

Mike, Jacksonville FL (Sent Sunday, September 07, 2008 9:03 AM)

Thanks for the link to the sciencedebate2008 site, I will be sending all of my colleagues here to check it out (I am a medical microbiogist).

That being said, I just have to make a snarky response to a fellow respondent (I won't bother mentioning the wealth of reading-comprehension impaired people who left comments, because that has been more than adequately covereed already).

And the prize for the most long-winded, completely pointless rambling comment left by a fellow respondent goes to: JD, of Seattle,!
<!!!and the crowd goes wild!!!> Well.... they would if they weren't asleep after reading all of that swill.
If, OTOH, JD just wanted to see if anyone would be gullible enough to read the whole dang thing in hopes of finding that it would all to be tied together in the end I have no choice but to curtsey and say "well played!".

Jess, Seattle, WA (Sent Sunday, September 07, 2008 10:06 AM)

As they snark, "Reading Comprehension FTW..."

Wow.

I did miss discussion of whether the political markets were sufficiently liquid -- as I recall, the markets during the primaries were responding to some pretty goofy signals (and missing some of the more important ones).

Part of the problem, of course, is that they're relatively small markets, and worse, individual investors face significant legal hurdles in joining the market (else I'd have taken a nice profit on Obama's primary victory).

Carrington Ward (Sent Sunday, September 07, 2008 11:13 AM)

Seeing as this turned into a political forum, I would like my thoughts represented.
I think these bounces are artificial to say the least. When the Telephone rings and you answer a question about who you like the best, your answer could be the same as a thousand other callees because you live in an area that is an enclave for your particular choice. They pick a group of registered voters. Where do they get the list? Is it one party's list, or an equal number from each party? Is it a blind list, not knowing who is Democrat, Republican or from a third party? If it is an equal amount from both parties, there would be no bounce for either party. We will have to see who wins in November to really know who got the "bounce".
At this time, if I would bet I would put my money on McCain-Palin. I think they usurped the "Change" mantra from Obama-Biden. For someone that has only been an actve member of the US Senate for 11 weeks out of the 2 years he was in, Sen. Obama is an empty suit. Senator Biden: "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy," Biden said. "I mean, that's a storybook, man." Biden also said that Senator Obama wasn't ready to be POTUS during the Primaries.
Governor Palin brought a new excitment into the Republican party and woke up a lot of Republicns. It showed when 24 hours after she was announced, McCain's campaign got a bonus of $10 Million US.
I think we really have a good chance for the correct "Change" without the Taxes that Sen. Obama wants to inflict on America. With the higher taxes, he could deepen the Recession we are in to a Depression. Failing banks, job lose, dollar devalued, high production costs and a law called, Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act (a 50% tax on imported goods)slowed the economy to a crawl and then into a Depression for not only the USA but for the world in 1929. What we need to keep businesses going are less taxes and more international trade. You can see that NAFTA and other trade policies are in serious jeapordy with Sens. Obama-Biden. To keep prosperous, we need our goods going all over the world. We can't use all of what we produce only here at home.
Sens. Obama and Biden want the price of oil to skyrocket to "Save the Planet" as Nancy Pelosi said. Well, if you can't afford to go to work, there will be no money to tax, no money to pay the bills. No money for the tourist industry which relies solely on people traveling. We have the capability to use our coal cleanly, our oil in the western states, Alaska, on the continental shelf along with putting incentive money into solar, wind and other alternative fuels without doing any more damage to the earth. We have to learn to work together without the in-fighting between parties. Only Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin can accomplish that with their history of doing so.
McCain-Palin 60%
Obama-Biden 40%

Delmar Fairchild, Barron, WI (Sent Sunday, September 07, 2008 12:23 PM)

After Warren's interview of the candidates about religion, I wish an interviw on science would be televised as well. Unfortunately, while Obama was very honest when asked about being pro-choice, why do I suspect Mr. Can't Google and Mrs. Flat Earth would lie and say they are all for scientific advancement?

McCain has traded every principle for the presidency, including torture. After eight miserable years of anti-intellectualism and having the fundamentalist fringe dictate their beliefs to the rest of the country, this should be important in this election. People want change that will move us forward, not backward.

In the meantime, a factor that people forget when predicting elections is region. People in red states thought Bill Clinton didn't have a chance. I made money on some personal bets that year.

TruePatriot (Sent Sunday, September 07, 2008 1:35 PM)

Interesting article. Somehow you went from the stock issue to the 14 questions.
I would like to know why Stem Cell Research is one of those questions or why it is anybody's question. There is not one infintsmal shred of evidence that stem cells hold the remotest possiblity of healing anything. On the other hand ADULT cell research HAS proven to be a Very Real possible answer to many of the diseases and health issues touted by stem cell research proponets, and no one has to lose their life.
Why are we throwing good money after bad with stem cells instead of throwing good money after good with a proven track record? After all that is how we look at stock investments in the first place.
Is stem cell research really good science or even allow for an intellectual approach? Evidence would say no. Or is this just a radical group, with the ear of the press, and they can see how they can line their pockets with money? Ours!
I am a firm believer in science, just look at how many things we take for granted every day just because one president decided to 'go to the moon'.
I am Not a rocket scientist, I knew one once, he was in our Montana State Legislature. Let me assure you I am not a rocket scientist, I have entirely too much common sense.
John Townsend, MT

John Vandenacre, Townsend, MT (Sent Sunday, September 07, 2008 2:22 PM)

Let me get this straight, people are making money out of influencing our thinking? ('...plop down money...and shares on the candidates') Now, I know we have hit a new low.

WE need to change the way elections are run.
1) Consolidate primaries
Too few states make the decision for the rest of
us.
2) Have primary debates where every person gets asked the same question so we can hear all of their views; not just the front runners according to these money making polls.
3) Shorten the campaign from 18 months to 9 months. The advertisers and television industry are making too much money in the current system.
4) Change the roles of our Executive Office.
A candidate doesn't seem to be experienced in both the Domestic problems and the Foreign problems.
We need someone to concentrate soley on Foreign Policy and another one to concentrate soley on Domestic Policy. The economy boomed during Clinton, but the terrorists gained ground. The economy suffered under Bush as his attention was always on matters overseas.

a. Expand the role of the Vice President as the Domestic Policy coordinator and the President is the Foreign Policy coordinator.
or
b. Perhaps we should have 2 presidents and 0 Vice Presidents. Gee, they could be from different parties!

Lisa (Sent Sunday, September 07, 2008 2:44 PM)

MSNBC's bias has them looking stupid again. The Palin Speech alone has given them a +10 bounce in the Gallup Daily Tracking Poll. MSNBC needs to start recognizing they are hurting Obama's chances by putting their love affair on open display for all to see.

BM, philly, PA (Sent Sunday, September 07, 2008 3:23 PM)

Electronic Markets? More like the Iowa Electronic Bookies.

This is gaming the election. Appropos to the ugly tone of these campaigns from Day One.

S.Y. (Sent Sunday, September 07, 2008 3:32 PM)

How often are these odds makers right?

Kentucky Betty (Sent Sunday, September 07, 2008 7:34 PM)

Would it be possible for the writer of this article to give more info on how accurate this silly and modern idea of prediction markets really is? You hear a lot about this these days, how markets are great predictors, etc., but I haven't seen any sober analysis of whther this works. Certainly, for example, the credit markets failed to predict the housnig bubble burst, or the tech bubble burst, or the coming Google bubble burst, etc., etc., etc., so I wonder what scientists or non-biased people would say about the power of these silly experiments to actually predict anything. if they are like the asset markets, one would expect a "false consensus" phenonemon to happen, for example everyone convince eachother that Obama is the likely winner, right up until his bubble bursts in November. It is quite possiblt that these silly market based predictors are far less reliable than just experts guessing, just as many experts could tell you the housing market was going to collapse (look at goldman sachs) but the market had no clue and got caught flat-footed.

[ALAN ADDS: I did link to the research based on 1988-2000 results, and there's a paper in the works saying that based on 1988-2004, the markets did better than the polls 74 percent of the time. The market "significantly outperforms the polls" in predicting results 100 days before the election, according to the University of Iowa study. Of course, the U of I is the outfit that presents the IEM, but you can review the results for yourself:]

http://www.biz.uiowa.edu/faculty/trietz/papers/long%20run%20accuracy.pdf

Sharn Cedar, Philadelphia, PA (Sent Sunday, September 07, 2008 8:56 PM)

Things change, including minds -
Gallup 9/7/08 McCain 48% Obama 45%
There are a lot of people who realize that Obama will not stand up against politics as usual. People want change, but trading the Republican machine for the democratic machine is not change. Obama is the ultimate talking head for the democratic party.

R Bloom Richland Wash (Sent Sunday, September 07, 2008 9:35 PM)

Mr. Boyle should stick to pure science for which he has enjoyed a rather respectable reputation. Now, after venturing into speculation, partisan politics, crap shots, Las Vegas shilling, smoke filled rooms, hucksters, and biased opinions, his reputation has more dirty rings does than Saturn.

Odds Are, Pahrump, NV (Sent Sunday, September 07, 2008 10:25 PM)

To Nick of Seattle, WA:

A fair response to your question about the idiocy of Alan Boyle would be the following: only idiots comment on articles they don't understand. Your metion of the lag in the polls clearly expresses your lack of understanding of the political markets. This article was not about polls, if you didn't notice. Polls were only mentioned peripherally, and your lack of attention to detail ruined the credibility of your comment. Please! Alan obviously has done more research in this area than you have. This is actually an interesting issue that economiists study. How DO polls compare with markets in predicting the outcomes of elections? The major point of this article: while the polls see a bounce after the conventions, the markets do not.

Alan, maybe you should simplify, just in case Nick reads anything else on your column. But wait! That would make it boring for me. . .

Dave, OK (Sent Sunday, September 07, 2008 10:31 PM)

John Vandenacre: embryonic stem cell research offers plenty that adult stem cell research doesn't. Embryonic stem cells can differenctiate into ANY tissue in the body, while adult stem cells are significantly more limited. Embryonic stem cells have the potential to be useful in the very near future, while adult stem cells are clearly a more distant hope due to the set of hurdles keeping them from differentiating as readily. Funding embryonic stem cell research is important to many people (and with good reason), so it is an important issue for reasonable candidates to discuss. Given your strongly anti-embryonic stem cell stance and my strong opinion in favor, I would say that this issue will have sway in the national elections, rather than just in political markets and polls. In the political markets, people ultimately put their money on the candidate they THINK will win, rather than on the candidate they HOPE will win. To do otherwise would be a very expensive, yet ineffective way to support a candidate. Denying that the issue of embryonic stemm cell research should be important (as you do) seems to be a self-defeating strategy, given the issue is already important. A policy statement about embryonic stem cell research has the potential to make or break the election for either candidate.

Dave, OK (Sent Sunday, September 07, 2008 11:25 PM)

actually, Mccain now has a 10 point lead on Obama according to the Usa today poll! Who is going to win! Mccain has to win! [...]
Go Mccain/Palin 2008!

Steven (Sent Sunday, September 07, 2008 11:25 PM)

Thanks for the article, Alan. I've been lightly involved in these prediction markets for some time, and I believe they are a great way to aggregate information in a large group and bring out "the wisdom of the crowd." It works better than polling for many reasons, not least of which is that those who are good at it are rewarded (and in the future, have more influence over the market) than those who are bad at it.

But there's a more subtle distinction to make here: polls and futures markets are not measuring the same thing. For example: a poll where 40% of respondents favor McCain predicts only that, at that moment, 40% of people favor McCain. It doesn't mean he has a 40% chance of winning. Conversely, a futures market value of 40 cents means that the market, as a whole, gives him a 40% chance of winning; it doesn't mean that 40% of the traders favor him. It could be that none of the traders like him, or all of them do, but regardless of what outcome they would prefer, as a group they estimate McCain winning as an outcome that's only 40% likely.

In short: futures markets show who the traders expect to win, while polls show who respondents want to win.

Joe Strout, Fort Collins, CO (Sent Sunday, September 07, 2008 11:40 PM)

"He is a discredit to anyone wearing a uniform with his chronic POW pandering...Oh BOO HOO HOO. That was then John - what have you done for US lately???"

Considering how often I heard the week prior about how Barack Obama asked Michelle out on their first date (apparently his equivalent formative experience to McCain's POW experience) McCain's infusion of actual examples of personal courage, accomplishment and sacrifice were refreshing.

Although I'm sure Obama was very good at filling up cups of orange soda to get the community organized back in the day.

Keith Doberman, Abject, Denial (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 1:09 AM)

Too many people (mostly pro McCain types) haven't read the article properly. This isn't a general poll, it is a poll taken by the market. I agreed that it is probably more accurate simply because it isn't based on emotion. It appears that this predicts Obama winning. This gives me hope because I am fearful of continuing the downward spiral this country has been in under Bush and Cheney, who as far as I am concerned are war criminals.

Lisa, Freeport, NY (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 3:56 AM)

So who's the idiot now? McCain was down by 8 in the pre-convention Gallup poll, and now is up by 4. Before you go writing a stupid article like this, how about you wait for the data to be gathered.

Bill Heilmann, Chicago IL (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 4:51 AM)

On November 4th there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth in the B.O. camp. Many of us that support John McCain choose to remain silent till that day...

Don Fry (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 5:11 AM)

Boyle, you idiot!

Bill, VA (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 7:25 AM)

Kudos to management for finally throwing Olbermon & Mathews into the trash dumpsters..no two people deserved it more now CNN do the same to contributer Paul Bagala this nut just makes NO sense even Howard Dean smartened up a little bit. I stoppd watching MSNBC because of the two fired guys now I will go back.

Betty Johnson (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 8:59 AM)

How large is this artificial market? How much capital is invested in it? And how many individul investors participate? Makes a big difference in how easy it would be to manipulate it if there is $50,000 invested as opposed to $5,000,000.

EBoone, North Huntingdon, PA (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 9:31 AM)

McCains ahead YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!

llrine (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 9:46 AM)

What is of real interest to me is the bounce Palin brought to the ticket with Republican males. The convention unified the GOP. To use a sports metaphor, it's about moving the ball. The GOP has momentum which they have lacked all year. They have succeeded where Hilliary was unable to go by putting pressure on media about pro bias towards Obama. My opinion of MSNBC has become more positive as they have moved toward more objectivity which was lacking with Olberman and Matthews.

J1ggy Marion (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 10:46 AM)

I think Obama is clearly the loser of the 2 recent conventions. The dems are not very worried that the Repubs have good momentum moving forward and obsviously America identifies with Sarah Palin more than any Senator involved in the election process. Sarah Palin is the best thing to happen in Politics in a long time and the dems now realise they blew it not involving Hilary as the choice for VP. I only hope Sarah can get the opportuity to get into Washington to challenge the Good Old boys network in her own party as well as the dems.

J.E., Parsippany, New Jersey (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 11:30 AM)

Look at the "bounce" numbers today....McCain by 4%. That is an 11% increase from after the Democrats convention. That is huge!! I guess maybe more people like McCain and Palin than you thought. Get in touch with the rest of America guys!

Yorn Mcgee (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 12:59 PM)

I think the main reason for the feeble bounces we have seen is that political conventions have become the most boring spectacles imaginable, right up there with the old USSR May Day parades. When the only surprise allowed, if any, is the vice-presidential pick, you know you will have a lot of snoozers in front of their TV screens during the.

dusky, Portola, CA (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 12:59 PM)

Keith Doberman,

what has Obama EVER done for me now or lately?

Yorn mcgee West America (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 1:02 PM)

I just loved reading this article today. It was just icing on the cake after hearing that Keith "I wanna bear BOs child!" Obermann and Chris "Spooging for Obama" Matthews were demoted.

Fred Jarreau (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 1:20 PM)

Where have you folks been. Has anyone not seen the polls as of Sunday, which was all over the national news. Where does this writer get his info. Like it or not, it shows McCain with a 3-4 point lead, even by NBC and MSNBC's standard. I can't believe you folks have your head in the sand on this and are ignoring the most recent polls as though they do not exist. Get a grip, but maybe you don't want to face reality.

Wes Moss (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 1:42 PM)

Has any article written this month been more wrong? hey Viola of Hudson, there was a Bounce, an 11 point swing type of bounce. Of Course the Liberal Media had hoped against it, but unfortunately the people have other ideas and dont listen to you anymore. HUGE BOUNCE! NOW IN THE LEAD BOUNCE, OBAMA PANIC MODE BOUNCE.

This writer should be embarrased trying to push his own agenda outside of the facts. Oh Wait, its Keith Olbermans MSNBC, enough said.

Mike New York (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 2:30 PM)

YOU ALWAYS MANAGE TO GET IT WRONG!! HAVEN'T YOU SEEN THE NEWEST POLL? MCCAIN AND PALIN ARE UP 5 POINTS!!

COLEEN (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 2:55 PM)

the RNC did get a million more viewers

John Doe (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 3:11 PM)

THIS STORY IS ABSOLUTELY WRONG. MCCAIN GOT AN 8 POINT BOUNCE. THE STORY USES A POLL TAKEN BEFORE THE CONVENTION. ANOTHER MEDIA STORY THAT IS REALY SLANTED AGAINST MCCAIN. Go back to school and learn to be a reporter and then right your story.

JeromeM Atlanta GA (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 3:20 PM)

I don't know what planet most of the people who wrote to you are on but McCain is now ahead in the polls. What is much more important is he will win the election by alot. Obama says he is an agent for change and what does he do with his first big decision? He picks a live long Washington politician. Actions always speak louder than words.

J D Long (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 3:50 PM)

First, to twocents ... I have to disagree with your assessment of the internet. The vast majority of people that I know use it to share and gain insight, information, wisdom, and find help with everything from how to kill a cockroach to what foods and herbs will help medical conditions. The sharing of porn is still only a small portion of internet use, compared to that.

And to Alan ... What an odd assortment of responses! So much frothing over polls, which this article is not about, leaves me scratching my head. Did these guys even read the article? Or are they oblivious to the difference between polls and prediction markets? Nary a query about questions like ... have the prediction markets in past years EVER made a large change right after conventions, and what kinds of activities (such as Edwards' wife's illness becoming known) have seemed to actually make changes in them? Which ones have turned out to be wrong? That would be fun to know.

SilverGuardian, Beaverton OR (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 4:51 PM)

I am wondering if this debate will bring up the issue of a government's role in cencering and changing scientific data. The Union of Concerned Scientists and many members of the EPA tell of wide spread censorship of scientific data, durring the current administration. Will the ethics of this issue be part the ScienceDebate 2008?

Michael, Chicago (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 5:24 PM)

Apparently you were right, until you were wrong, 72 hours later. McCain bounce is now 11 points with registered voters and 17 points with likely voters according to Gallup considering that he was 7 points down going into the Republican Convention. Be careful what you forsee or the bounce could be yours as Keith and Chris recently learned the hard way.

JBS, Richmond VA (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 6:14 PM)

Perhaps the bounce (whether measured by market predictive means or by polls) was originally an indicator of the slowness of news dissemination -- a factor that no longer exists. Perhaps Alan B. can come up with some quick statistics on whether or not bounces have been getting smaller over the years...

[As I mentioned, the Iowa Electronic Markets, which has been doing this for 20 years, has never seen a post-convention bounce. There are developments that move the markets, and the markets can be wrong. A recent example of that was the Democratic New Hampshire primary, when the market favored Obama but Clinton won. So the markets are not infallible. They just turn out to be often better than the polls.]

j9 (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 6:21 PM)

McNasty (as his friends nicknamed him eons ago) seems to be evening things out, but we'll see in November. As an economist, I believe in the predictive power of market forces---Obama will win.

John McCain (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 6:35 PM)

Well I see thier alot of Obama hopefulls in here, But you better look at the polls ,I think McCain got the bounce he need and got his word outand befor he done I think his running mate will Bring alot of Voters to his side, But time will tell

Stephen Kay (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 9:57 PM)

9/8/2008, the poling data is now in. Ha, can you say superball. Bounce indeed. Alan Boyle, how about an update on that McCain stock. I should have bought it on Friday I suspect.

[ALAN ADDS: Sigh ... Once again, I need to point out that the item was about political predictive markets ... not about polls, not about TV ratings. Such markets have been shown to be more accurate at determining the result of an election than polls, and they have never been seen to reflect the "conventional" post-convention bounce. I did update the item with the latest closing figures for Sunday night, and if you like I can update it with the closing figures for tonight as well. But at some point you're going to have to look them up yourselves.

[If you had bought your shares in the Republican winner-take-all market at Friday's average price (41.2 cents) and sold them at today's average price (44.7 cents), you would indeed have made 3.5 cents per share, and that would qualify as a bounce in my book. So I acknowledge that the market has moved upward. But if you had sold those shares on Saturday's average price (40.2 cents), you would have lost a penny a share. So there have been ups and downs rather than a consistent upward spike.

[By the way, I'm not posting any messages that are simply scurrilous campaign screeds about the candidates ... for example, claiming that such-and-such a candidate is doing such-and-such a horrible thing or is terrible for such-and-such a reason. But I'm posting every message that calls me an idiot. I'm just a masochist at heart, I guess.]

John Rathbone, Golden, CO (Sent Monday, September 08, 2008 11:12 PM)

What planet do you live on. All the polls show McCain got a huge bounce from the convention. They also show that Palin was very intrumental in generating excitement for the ticket.

Bill M, Leesburg, VA (Sent Tuesday, September 09, 2008 5:47 AM)

I am not surprised that most of the McBush/Plain supporters can't read and comprehend what the article is about. They keep blabbering, You wrong this poll say he up this much or Ha Ha he up even more. Use your brain please. That is not what the article is about. The article explains how the political predictive market is more acurate than polls in the last 100 days of an election. The MARKET not the polls, has shown no "bounce" from both parties conventions during the past 20 years. Half of the American voters are mentally challenged and a majority of them reside in red states. Being from Idaho I know first hand.

T,Boise, Idaho (Sent Tuesday, September 09, 2008 6:30 AM)

Only McCain is now seeing a very significant bounce. He moved from under 40% to around 45% on Intrade and from 30% to 40% with Hubdub (http://www.hubdub.com). He has been climbing pretty much since Sarah Palin spoke at the convention.

Nigel Eccles (Sent Tuesday, September 09, 2008 12:10 PM)

<< Previous

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1355855

More Cosmic Log

Recent Posts:

Archives:

Categories:

Latest Tech & Science News

Syndicate This Site

Add Cosmic Log to your news reader:

ABOUT COSMIC LOG