In recent years, for a new book, I have spent time in a community of like-minded thinkers who take calculated risks for a living. These people, from poker players to venture capitalists — I call them the River, and they are from Silicon Valley, Wall Street, sports betting, crypto — make decisions based not on what they know at the moment but on expected value. For them, when it is time to make a decision, the question is: Do the risks outweigh the rewards?

The River is the rival of the group of academics, journalists and policy wonks that I call the Village. This term might be more familiar: It’s the East Coast expert class. Harvard and Yale. The New York Times and The Washington Post. Together, these communities make up only a small percent of the population — in short, they are elites.

The Village tends toward risk aversion, as evident in its Covid caution and its increasing wariness about free speech (which very much can have sticks-and-stones consequences). It tends to make decisions by consensus, with dissenters punished by ostracization — or if you prefer, cancellation.

The River has been on a winning streak in terms of its impact on society and our economy: Its core industries, tech and finance, continually grow as fractions of the economy, and Las Vegas is bringing in record revenues. Not just baseball but pretty much everything has been “Moneyball”-ized, which is to say quantified and then monetized in some way.

The groups don’t map equally clearly onto our political institutions. In Trumpian times, with voting highly polarized along educational lines, the Village is overwhelmingly Democratic. The River’s politics aren’t quite as straightforward. Aloof and analytical, preoccupied with pursuits such as poker, not everyone in the River is a G.O.P. partisan. In fact, if you surveyed people I consider part of the River about their preferred presidential candidates, my guess is that Kamala Harris would get more votes than Donald Trump — although with an outsize third-party vote.

Yet since the book went to press, something surprising has happened. So far in the 2024 election, the Village has been making better risk-management decisions — out-Rivering the River. The presidential race remains close, but at least for now it looks like the Village is winning.

At least the Village got the most important decision right: kicking President Biden to the curb. In so doing, they roughly doubled their chances of winning, from Mr. Biden’s 27 percent chance in my election forecast model at the time he withdrew from the race to Ms. Harris’s 54 percent the week of the Democratic National Convention.

To understand why, it helps to know that the River can be prone to contrarianism. As the Village has become bluer and bluer, some communities within the River have rebelled by becoming, to varying degrees, red-pilled in response. The hedge fund manager Bill Ackman’s war against the presidents of the University of Pennsylvania, Harvard and M.I.T. marked an inflection point in open warfare between the River and the Village