I’ve got some meatier posts in the works, but they’re not quite ready for prime time (or whatever time you think this blog operates on, probably that weird half-hour Newfoundland thing), so in the meantime here’s a little diversion.
After I recently wrote about the oncoming scourge of gambling on everything prediction markets, the thought crossed my mind, Can you bet on Vermont stuff? Like politics, for example?
The answer is, of course you can. But the shape and size of the markets reinforces one of my core beliefs: Hardly anybody cares about Vermont politics. (I’ve been writing about it for almost 15 years, and I’m fully aware of the limited audience.) Which makes the prediction markets useless when it comes to crowdsourced insight. The available propositions have garnered so little interest that they have no predictive value whatsoever.
Take the above screenshot from Kalshi, one of the two major players in the barely-disguised gambling prediction market business. The two people getting the lion’s share of the action are extremely unlikely to run for governor: Attorney General Charity Clark and Treasurer “Smilin’ Mike” Pieciak. And holding down a distant third is House Speaker Jill Krowinski, who’s not even on the long lists of rumored candidates.
Not appearing at all: The only declared Democratic candidate, Amanda Janoo. It wouldn’t be the worst idea to lay down a few shekels on her because (so far) she’s the only one who’s actually, you know, running.
Even more telling about the lack of interest in #vtpoli: Only about $5,000 has been spent in Kalshi’s marketplace for this race. Compare that to the far more vibrant Kalshi propositions on UVM basketball. Catamount games routinely draw over a half million dollars in wagers predictions — 100 times more action than on the Democratic race for governor. A UVM/Maine game in February generated more than $3,000,000 in action.
Priorities, I know.
Continue reading
The Vermont Political Observer. 