@AndrewG adding subsidy

FWIW, nate silver's model has this at 38.3%

76% joint chance of winning the popular vote!

To clarify, this only resolves "exactly 50%" if she literally gets exactly half of the popular vote?

https://manifold.markets/AndrewG/kamala-harriss-2024-popular-vote-sh#o5pe0hqj0db

Oops, thanks!

as always, Cumulative Independent markets are the best for this kind of market

@AndrewG Are we rounding this to the nearest percentafg point? Because odds of a fair coin landing on heads exactly 75 million times out of 150 million is basically zero.

should be to the tenth imo, like this ^

but obviously up to Andrew, who currently holds 2000 NO on =50% so im guessing he won’t make it nearest percentage point.

No rounding!

In 50% of worlds there's an odd number of total votes, and in that case, a 75000000-75000001 result would still not count as exactly 50%

my two cents: for markets like this, you should just arbitrarily assign "exactly 50%" (which is so extremely unlikely) to some bucket

Wait, what does popular vote mean? If she has >50% has she not by definition wom the popular vote?

Yes; thus the absence of a ">50%, loses popular vote" option

Sorry for being dense. If she has less than 50% how can she win the popular vote?

@kevor RFK or others could pull a couple points from kamala/trump

Sorry yeah, of course, thanks :)