One such possible map, in which dems just barely win:
If the winner of the 2024 US Presidential Election has 277 or fewer electoral votes, this question resolves yes.
In a typical election with only two candidates winning EVs, this means the outcome is within eight electoral votes(inclusive) of a 269-269 tie. For example if you take the above map and you flip Nevada to blue you get 276-262, or if you flip New Hampshire to red you get 266-272. Either of those would count.
If any candidate gets 278 or more electoral votes, this market resolves No.
Resolution will be based on a consensus of credible reporting of which candidate won each state, after any relevant recounts. Resolution does not count any shenanigans in the election certification process or potential insurrections.
1,000
1.00There is only 8% chance the winner has <= 277 EV in Nate Silver's model under the "Cumulative distribution" section. https://www.natesilver.net/p/nate-silver-2024-president-election-polls-model
Seems like the criteria has a little bit of a hole around situations where some electoral votes go to a third candidate. What if the results are 263-262-13? That's not within 8 votes of a 269-269 tie. Maybe you can just clarify that bit a little bit more.
With this trading at 4%, I'm not very worried about that edge case. But if this were to happen, this market would resolve based on if any candidate got 278 votes or more. If they did, this resolves no. If all candidates have 277 or fewer, this resolves yes.
@Joshua I think this is the one you should be comparing for weird electoral vote counts:
/mirrorbot/acx-2024-will-there-be-faithless-el
@Eliza I think that the electoral count reform act helps with this, but I suppose I should start clarifying for markets like this that I intend to resolve based on when the races are all called by the AP. I don't want to wait until january in any case. I'll work on the wording for that.
@Joshua O.o
Ah, then I have totally misunderstood the question. I thought it was specifically about the electoral votes. I'm glad I wrote something now, before it became an issue.
@Eliza Yeah I'm not trying to resolve on election night or anything, but legal challenges and faithless electors are a different thing than the actual election. In 2020 this would have resolved after the recounts were done, but before the certification.
@MP curiously the 100,000 votes market would have resolved NO in the past 2 elections, but Manifold is reasonably confident at 70% that the election won't be close this time
Strongest case for a republican win with this resolving yes would probably be that Nevada or Arizona go blue, while Wisconsin or Minnesota go red:
@Tumbles I keep getting the math very slightly wrong, I think it's now asking what I meant to ask though.