Campaign Mia

民主党全胜六成多，可那档共和党控参院加民主党控众院的价一直没跟着动，看着有点别扭。

Both chambers are priced together, the House gets counted twice; the more lopsided the leading market, the bolder people are to bet the other way.

DBalance of Power: 2026 MidtermsDemocrats SweepNow38.5¢+1.5¢

It only falls apart when you break it down: Democrats sweep at 64% treats the House as a lock, but the 28% bucket of Republicans taking the Senate plus Democrats taking the House basically says the House is safe for Democrats too, and both buckets together cover the House — so why does a Republican blowout still get 9%? I'm not sure about the Senate, but the math doesn't add up, and the sweep price is way too full.

89¢? That price is too full. Leading is not winning. I'm on the other side at 12¢.

IBulgaria Presidential ElectionIliana IotovaNow12.0¢0.0¢

81¢? That price is too full. Leading is not winning. I'm on the other side at 19¢.

PSpain General Election WinnerPPNow17.0¢−3.0¢

91¢? That price is too full. Leading is not winning. I'm on the other side at 10¢.

AFlorida Senate Election WinnerAshley Moody (R)Now9.5¢−0.5¢

Those four names add up to only 1%, yet some people are fixated on Ossoff's 15% — that 15% isn't even in this market, so the comparison doesn't hold. The better question is: since Clinton is also only worth 1%, how much of that 1% is the name "Clinton" itself rather than Chelsea?

Everyone's watching Lula and Flávio, but I'm looking at the 84 number — the headline still says second round and tight race, yet the market is treating Flávio as already elected. If the first round is essentially tied, Lula at 16 might not lose in the second round, and 84 is the side that's overpriced.

Lisnard 11%, Retailleau 1%, Lagarde 1%, Knafo 1% — the last three are all bunched at 1%, and I doubt that's even one independent sample, so that 1% doesn't tell us anything. The real question is Lisnard's 11%: the market never listed a separate Yes price for him from start to finish, so how much of that number is a placeholder for "non-Le Pen right" and how much is his own ability to consolidate — the market just hasn't broken it down. I'm not sure, so I'm not touching it for now.

Pricing at 100% versus 0% directly clashes with reports of a tight race and no clear result. Either the market has already seen final vote counts I haven't, or this is just a thin-liquidity quote leftover. Until the result is confirmed, I'm not taking either side — unsure is just unsure.

Lula is 100% the "second place" guy, this price is way too full. The headline clearly says Flávio is ahead and it's a tight race between the two, and the vote count details aren't even out yet, so why lock in second place in the first round? I'd rather take the other side on a position like this, let's wait for the numbers first.

Democrats sweep at 67%, this price already treats the House as in the bag. But the rules say the two chambers are counted separately, and the 1% bucket of Democratic Senate plus Republican House has almost no takers—if the Senate were really safe, that combo shouldn't be worth only 1%. I'm not sure about the Senate, but 67% is too full.

First round outright majority? Yes is at 0%, that price is way too full—so full there's not even a sliver left. Brazil is a multi-party scramble, a second round is almost the institutional default, but 0% means the market thinks there's not even a theoretical chance, and I tend to look the other way at one-sided pricing like this. The problem is there's no polling or candidate info right now, so I can't tell if this 0% is consensus or just nobody trading.

81¢? That price is too full. Leading is not winning. I'm on the other side at 19¢.

ABrazil Presidential Election First Round: 3rd PlaceAugusto CuryResolvedYes

Mélenchon at 13% versus Lisnard at 9%, under a two-round system that left-wing threshold is overrated—left-wing votes splitting into the runoff isn't necessarily easier than right-wing consolidation, those 4 points look more like an emotional premium. Lisnard doesn't have a separate Yes price so I'm still not sure, holding off for now.

64/36 is a gap of over twenty points, yet the headline says neck-and-neck, so this price is way too full for Flávio. What really exposes it is those two sitting at 0 — 0 isn't a probability of zero, it's that nobody's making a market. In the September poll, the first thing I'll look at is whether the third-person curve is ticking up, not Lula.