Fair point. I think I recall on the eve of election Trump out to around 4/1 Clinton 1/5 on the betfair exchange.
You have offered some factors that may contribute to this distortion which I agree, but I think there would have to be something more substantial. I looked at the betfair exchange this morning - €77,741,2017 worth of bets matched already on this market. That is what I call a tight market, and yes, it points to something fundamentally askew (again) with polling data.
My main guess, is that the traditional polling data is becoming obselete, or less relevant, being eaten up by the internet and the emergence of social media. Traditionally, everyone got their news from a handful of mainstream media outlets. Those outlets, generally, gave scant time for what were considered 'minor' or 'fringe' views. Nowadays, anyone can have a multitude of views and opinions ranging across a huge variance of issues posted on their media stream. In turn, discovering what they may have considered 'fringe' views are actually more mainstream - the whole 'fake news' debate is nothing more than mainstream news, and in turn the traditional polling data, losing control of the narrative.
There has always been fake news, I grew up being advised of the maxim "don't believe everything you read in the newspapers", that's because my elders understood that the mainstream media were as capable of peddling fake news, propaganda, cover-ups etc as well as anyone - Bloody Sunday in Derry, Hillsborough disaster, WMD to name a few.
You can observe this in this country. Anyone with media feed on their smartphone can plug into the views of Gemma O'Doherty, John Waters, Jim Corr. While some of their views are outlandish to me, they do attract a following and that following is emboldened by the fact that increasing numbers are beginning to share some of those views, views that get scant time on traditional mainstream outlets. The offer by Claire Byrne to host a 'debate' between Jim Corr and Jedward on their 'Twitter spat' gives credence to the dismissive nature that traditional mainstream outlets do have for alternative viewpoints. Regardless of what anyone thinks of these 'fringe' views, the people who propagate them are deadly serious about them and hold a conviction about them. I would suggest it is a dangerous thing to dismiss or deride anyone's personal convictions. But unfortunately this is what is happening here, just as it is happening in the US. For instance, CNN alluding to recent social unrest and rioting being the work of Russia rather than social injustice, police brutality, etc. CNN peddling the Russia spooks theory feeds into Trumps narrative of mainstream media fake news.
The Director Michael Moore, warned in 2016 against all the polling data, that Trump was on course to win. He did so based on his own observations in his own State of Michigan which is traditionally Democrat, that people were angry. He is giving the same warning again today. Trump support is off the charts.
That's a fair point, but looking at the Betfair Exchange mentioned earlier, the market has been open for a couple of years with 20-30 prospective runners taking bets (including my own long-shot Tulsi Gabbard bets!).
Out of €77m bets matched, 56% are attributable to bets on Trump, 33% on Biden and 11% the rest of the field.
Last edited:
