Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Political Stock Market Simulation

Posted by michael on from the hedging-your-bets dept.

Elphaba Thropp writes "Zack Coburn (of ArsDigita fame) recently released Politics on ZackCoburn.com, a political stock market simulation in which 'political figures are the symbols. The price of each symbol will fluctuate as users rate it either positively or negatively.' Each user starts with $1,000,000, and can rate a symbol's performance every twenty-four hours. The site also offers user blogs, and contains a unique statistics page, in which the top users and symbols are shown, as well as the most liberally-owned and most conservatively-owned stocks are shown (based on a political survey each user can take). Interestingly enough, George W. Bush currently has the most liberal ownership."

8 of 41 comments (clear)

  1. Wow. by Sheetrock · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Remember when politics was about trying to figure out the best guy for the job?

    We've sure gotten away from that. The whole Swift Boat thing has made a great distraction from any meaningful issues that could be raised. And now a 'political stock market simulation'?

    What's wrong with politics that we do everything we can to stop from looking at it objectively? Why make it a game?

    --

    Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
    -- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.




  2. Why is Kerry trading at 3x Bush's value? by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And what is that supposed to mean in comparison to actual votes at the end of the race?

    --
    SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    1. Re:Why is Kerry trading at 3x Bush's value? by martianpenguin · · Score: 2, Informative

      Obviously there are no Bush supporters signed up yet. Or at least they didn't sign up before the price changed. There are not nearly enough people signed up yet to show a representative value.

  3. Huh by c0dedude · · Score: 3, Informative

    Why play for fake money when you can play for the real thing? Check this out.
    Disclamer: Not associated with this site, just remember it from a /. story.

    --
    Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
    1. Re:Huh by SeniorDingDong · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I recall an interview of somone that had been polled 6 times and said he had intentionally misled the pollsters so as to throw off those changing their politics based on those polls. With this in mind, I can think of a few things that would make such a device a better predictor. First, it's voluntary. Second, if one is playing with their own money, there's a real incentive to contribute honestly. Third, as there must surely be a continum of reasoning behind one's vote, a poll could tend to oversimplify responses subject to the poll maker's presuppositions. Forth, the lure of making money could tend to increase participation.

      Now that said, at least one disadvantage is this does not measure the tendency for someone to vote a certain way, but rather how he thinks everyone will vote and is thus a measure of our ability taken in the aggregate as analysts.

  4. Bush's liberal ownership by Malfourmed · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Interestingly enough, George W. Bush currently has the most liberal ownership.

    Maybe they're trying to short the stock?
    --
    a world in progress...
  5. Re:liberal stock by Dan+Grossman · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't think Bush has won yet. Kerry has gotten some good advice from the new campaign team and Clinton, and they're all telling him to ramp it up and start talking about the domestic issues instead of Vietnam. His latest website entries and commercials are about domestic issues instead of the war, so if he can ramp it up, he has a chance of coming back. I think the debates will help as well. Bush really didn't live up to the promises he made 4 years ago for economy, employment, healthcare, or education. If Kerry debates it right he can make himself look a lot better to more than 50% of Americans that don't really know his plan now. Bush will probably try to push for only two debates instead of three (Clinton did it, so the democrats would have a hard time saying anything about that), hopefully we'll see three.

    --


    Forget Google. Better Web Stats.
  6. Re:Liberal Ownership by zCyl · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There is a difference between being socially conservative and economically conservative. Bush is socially conservative, and the closest he comes to being economically conservative is cutting taxes for the wealthy. But his spending has been kept high enough to result in a massive debt.

    What the country needs is for one of the two political parties to shift its platform to being socially progressive and fiscally responsible. Bush opened the door for the Democratic party to choose this by taking the exact opposite stance, but the Democrats were so afraid of Bush that they just voted for the guy they thought everyone else would be most likely to vote for.