I'd really like to hear from more "not yet" voters why the market doesn't meet the resolution criteria in its description yet. It's odd to me too see so many votes but very little argument being made.

Not yet. Around 50% or so now.

It's like asking Trump in 2017 if he'd call the 2020 Election Rigged. he wouldn't rule it out then, but we need to wait until it happens to resolve the question.

i.e. right now Shapiro and Destiny would claim they're right about this, so we need to wait longer.

Maybe Shapiro updated from 1% (said 0%) to 10%, while Destiny updated from 95% (said 100%) to 99% in their internal models.

For this to resolve yes, you'd essentially need something where Shapiro would agree that Trump is running for a 3rd term and vice versa for NO.

@ChinmayTheMathGuy that seems reasonable, but only if you ignore the details in the market description

@ChinmayTheMathGuy market description says literally nothing about meeting Destiny and Shapiro’s internal mental models as a criteria for resolution.

@Balasar taking everything too literally.

It's obvious whatever Trump said on 3/30 was a joke (I'm not following too closely).

Maybe wait until the first bar is put into motion (like that bill from the TN congressman gets endorsed by Trump) instead of using an offhand comment by a power hungry narcissistic 2 months into his term.

If you really think that's enough to resolve YES, it should be clear that Trump is required to accept he's a "lame duck" for the entire 4 years to resolve NO.

It's obvious Trump would never make any concessions with no clear benefit for him, all he said is that it's far too early to talk about.

At least take him at his word.

@ChinmayTheMathGuy it is pretty clear that you are not following it too closely because what Trump said was "I'm not joking. I'm not joking." which is hard to qualify as a joke.

@Balasar

"I use a rather broad definition of 'attempt' here. Resolves to 'Yes' if there is any attempt by Trump to run for a third term as president. This includes public statements, fundraising efforts, or other indications suggesting he is considering a run for a third term."

OK sure it may fall under "consider" but not "attempt"

I'm not trading in the market so you can resolve however. I just think that the spirit of the market is whether he makes a real attempt (actions) because his words hold almost no weight.

@ChinmayTheMathGuy

e.g. a similar market would've already resolved YES based on his words

but is at 76% because his words don't hold much weight other than as leverage plays.

So him making no promises about a 3rd term is inconclusive by my judgment since it's obviously a leverage play.

https://manifold.markets/RichardHanania/trump-impose-large-tariffs-in-first

Another example

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-says-youll-never-see-me-again-loses-to-biden-2020-9

if we had a market on if Trump would never be heard from in 2020, resolving based on that comment would have taken his words too literally.

@ChinmayTheMathGuy The market you cite has a specific resolution criteria, namely that the the US weighted average tariff is at least 6%. This has nothing to do with words and everything to do with what the the US weighted average tariff is. On the other hand, this market includes public statements as a valid reason for market resolution, which is what a statement to a journalist is.

@ChinmayTheMathGuy the section you cite makes it clear that it's not about attempting but about considering. You are right that it's very hard to determine what he is considering which is why this poll exists.

It's very poorly worded because everything leads us to believe the question is talking about attempting to run, until we get to "indications suggesting he is considering a run for a third term," in which case I can only vote Yes on this poll, because that statement is changing the criteria to "considering" instead of "attempting"

@spiderduckpig also leaves lots of room for interpretation since we cannot read his mind and he is just a waterfall of incoherent statements. It's like kremlinology.

I actually think the question rules are so poorly worded it should have resolved yes years ago. I mean hasn’t he been teasing a third run for before he was even elected again? If simply discussing it in a serious manner qualified for yes I don’t really understand why the question was even created. (I voted yes on this poll)

I'm really 50/50 on this, given the "it's too early to plan anything" remarks. If it doesn't resolve YES now it's likely to resolve YES later. 🤷

@Haiku the market doesn't require planning though, just considering: "or other indications suggesting he is considering a run for a third term."

That he is saying it's too early to plan and clarifying that he is serious, indicates that he is at least considering it which is what the market description says. Hard to mind read though, especially one this chaotic. I think Deanna Troi would get migraines from this one.

@AlexanderTheGreater your point about the difference between "considering" and "planning" has pushed me to Yes.

Putting a comment to remind myself that one of the NO votes here has changed their mind and is actually a YES vote.

@Balasar if this is referring to my earlier pushback due to lack of transcript, you don't need to do that. I didn't vote initially in order to wait for someone else to find the transcript. I only voted yes after you posted the link.

@AlexanderTheGreater no its referencing mathvc who voted NO on here but later changed their mind after I found the transcript

@Balasar Also Twig

“Will Trump attempt to run for president again?” is a different question than “Will Trump consider running for president again?”

@snazzlePop Markets resolve according to their specific rules not the topline question.

@Balasar I think it’s more fair to resolve by the spirit of the question than by narrow legalese interpretations of resolution criteria.

That said, it does seem that the spirit of Ammon’s question was closer to “Will Trump seriously consider running for or otherwise sitting in a third term as president?”

@snazzlePop There is no legalese here. (not sure why we are having this conversation in two markets) The question clearly includes public statements, which a comment to a major journalist in a press interview certainly qualifies as.

Bear in mind this sentence from the description "Resolves to 'Yes' if there is any attempt by Trump to run for a third term as president. This includes public statements, fundraising efforts, or other indications suggesting he is considering a run for a third term."