Once again, and for the third election in a row, the pollsters got it terribly wrong, but to those of us who watch financial markets, Trump’s victory was no surprise.

Right up to election day, mainstream polls painted a murky picture: they predicted it was too close to call, giving Harris an edge in the popular vote and warning the count could drag on for weeks. Some polls even showed Harris gaining momentum in the campaign’s final days.

What happened was less red wave and more red tsunami, with Trump winning the electoral college, popular vote, all seven swing states, the house and the senate.

The pollsters may have thought Kamala Harris had a chance, but the markets were all in on Donald Trump.Credit: AP

“For the first time in 50 years of public polling, the average survey in every state underestimated the same candidate [Trump],” data scientist John Burn-Murdoch wrote in the Financial Times in the days following the decisive victory.

The result should be the final nail in the coffin for the obsolete art of polling. From now on, financial markets, specifically prediction markets, will play a much greater role in gauging public sentiment.

They are superior simply because they harness the “wisdom of the crowds”. Unsurprisingly, when people have money on the line, they tend to take their predictions more seriously.

“Financial markets going to dominate traditional polls going forward,” foresees David Scutt, analyst at StoneX Financial.

“I was watching the swings in the betting and bond markets,........

© The Age