The "Inks Option" Straw Poll

[Tender Branson]

The Inks Option seems to have more supporters than mine, so we need to settle on a "frontrunner" for the database.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=149072.0

Who should it be (at least until March 6) ?

[© Tweed the Younger]

the leader on Intrade.  I challenge the community to present a greater approximation of an objective condition for Frontrunner.

[Californian Tony]

The leader in delegate count. As imperfect this might be, it's the only objective criterion.

[True Federalist]

For now, Romney.  While I hope he won't be able to buy his way to the nomination, it will be smoother to continue using him in the Polls section until such time as it becomes clear he won't be the nominee.

[© Tweed the Younger]

The leader in delegate count. As imperfect this might be, it's the only objective criterion.

the only objective criterion??

[Ѕenator Αverroës]

Probably a dumb question: Is the Atlas not equipped to track both Republican candidates?

EDIT: Only asking because, for the moment, I don't think that there's a fair way to pick between Romney and Santorum.

[True Federalist]

Probably a dumb question: Is the Atlas not equipped to track both Republican candidates?

Unfortunately, no.  It would be nice if it could, but with all the different front runners this year, it is understandable why not.

[Tender Branson]

The polls is pretty clear: We have to enter Romney as Obama's opponent until March 6.

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

the leader on Intrade.  I challenge the community to present a greater approximation of an objective condition for Frontrunner.

This was actually my thought as well.  Perhaps not the only criteria, but a main one.

[Californian Tony]

The leader in delegate count. As imperfect this might be, it's the only objective criterion.

the only objective criterion??

Yes. Intrade is nothing but the agregation of many subjective opinions.

[Gustaf]

The leader in delegate count. As imperfect this might be, it's the only objective criterion.

the only objective criterion??

Yes. Intrade is nothing but the agregation of many subjective opinions.

So is the delegate count...

[Californian Tony]

The leader in delegate count. As imperfect this might be, it's the only objective criterion.

the only objective criterion??

Yes. Intrade is nothing but the agregation of many subjective opinions.

So is the delegate count...

The delegates are the people who effectively choose the nominee.

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

The leader in delegate count. As imperfect this might be, it's the only objective criterion.

the only objective criterion??

Yes. Intrade is nothing but the agregation of many subjective opinions.

So is the delegate count...

The delegates are the people who effectively choose the nominee.

Although an early lead in the delegate count doesn't necessarily mean that lead will continue.

[Californian Tony]

The leader in delegate count. As imperfect this might be, it's the only objective criterion.

the only objective criterion??

Yes. Intrade is nothing but the agregation of many subjective opinions.

So is the delegate count...

The delegates are the people who effectively choose the nominee.

Although an early lead in the delegate count doesn't necessarily mean that lead will continue.

No, but it's still more objective than some people's prevision of what the final delegate count will be.

[Former Moderate]

the leader on Intrade.  I challenge the community to present a greater approximation of an objective condition for Frontrunner.

^^^

[© Tweed the Younger]

The leader in delegate count. As imperfect this might be, it's the only objective criterion.

the only objective criterion??

Yes. Intrade is nothing but the agregation of many subjective opinions.

and Lacan said,  because we can never achieve the objective/truth condition, a pluralistic conglomeration of the subjective is the best we can hope to achieve.

[Gustaf]

The leader in delegate count. As imperfect this might be, it's the only objective criterion.

the only objective criterion??

Yes. Intrade is nothing but the agregation of many subjective opinions.

So is the delegate count...

The delegates are the people who effectively choose the nominee.

Although an early lead in the delegate count doesn't necessarily mean that lead will continue.

No, but it's still more objective than some people's prevision of what the final delegate count will be.

I'm not sure what you mean by objective here. Intrade is an objective way of aggregating a number of subjective opinions. So is the delegate count, but to a lesser degree since the caucus systems tend to be quite undemocratic.

I think you might have a strange way of defining objective. You're making the subjective valuation between the current delegate count versus the Intrade numbers, saying that the former is a better predictor.

[adracman42]

I know that it's a little late now, but is there anything explicitly preventing us from just having separate maps for each candidate?

[Mr. Morden]

I know that it's a little late now, but is there anything explicitly preventing us from just having separate maps for each candidate?

That is what was done four years ago, wasn't it?  Weren't there separate Clinton vs. McCain and Obama vs. McCain maps?

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

I know that it's a little late now, but is there anything explicitly preventing us from just having separate maps for each candidate?

Well, it seems Dave has less free time than he did 4 years ago, but otherwise, no.

[Χahar]

Intrade is silly. Go with the leader in delegates on the basis of current polls:

[Californian Tony]

The leader in delegate count. As imperfect this might be, it's the only objective criterion.

the only objective criterion??

Yes. Intrade is nothing but the agregation of many subjective opinions.

So is the delegate count...

The delegates are the people who effectively choose the nominee.

Although an early lead in the delegate count doesn't necessarily mean that lead will continue.

No, but it's still more objective than some people's prevision of what the final delegate count will be.

I'm not sure what you mean by objective here. Intrade is an objective way of aggregating a number of subjective opinions. So is the delegate count, but to a lesser degree since the caucus systems tend to be quite undemocratic.

I think you might have a strange way of defining objective. You're making the subjective valuation between the current delegate count versus the Intrade numbers, saying that the former is a better predictor.

The delegate count is obviously not subjective, since delegates determine who the nominee will be.

[Gustaf]

The leader in delegate count. As imperfect this might be, it's the only objective criterion.

the only objective criterion??

Yes. Intrade is nothing but the agregation of many subjective opinions.

So is the delegate count...

The delegates are the people who effectively choose the nominee.

Although an early lead in the delegate count doesn't necessarily mean that lead will continue.

No, but it's still more objective than some people's prevision of what the final delegate count will be.

I'm not sure what you mean by objective here. Intrade is an objective way of aggregating a number of subjective opinions. So is the delegate count, but to a lesser degree since the caucus systems tend to be quite undemocratic.

I think you might have a strange way of defining objective. You're making the subjective valuation between the current delegate count versus the Intrade numbers, saying that the former is a better predictor.

The delegate count is obviously not subjective, since delegates determine who the nominee will be.

The delegate count right now does not determine who the nominee is. Anyway, that is not the definition of an objective measure.

Do you think Santorum has a smaller chance of being the nominee than Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich then? Since both of the latter are ahead of him in the delegate count...

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

When I thought up the plan, my initial thought was to have a 3-person panel made up of people involved in entering polls to make the decision: 1 Democrat (probably TenderBranson), 1 Republican (I figured myself), and 1 independent (possibly Joe).

Personally, I would use a variety of factors to choose a frontrunner, and Intrade would play heavily into my decision, but not be the sole factor.

[shua]

2 out of 3 for Intrade, Gallup Tracking Poll, and Delegates.  (In the unlikely event a different candidate is represented by each one, go back to state primary leaders)