@Phill @Bayesian for this question to resolve "YES" will Supreme Court need to explicitly deny review for a question about Obergefell v. Hodges or will it resolve "YES" if the court simply doesn't revisit it before the end of Trump's term

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-praises-project-2025-2000245 already happening. Hasn't reached anything close enough for a yes yet, but he's already softening his tone on it. Moment he thinks he can, he's going to sing its praises

Donald Trump changes tune on Project 2025—"Very conservative and very good"

The president-elect distanced himself from Project 2025 during his campaign, calling parts of it "ridiculous and abysmal."

@Marnix Do you think he's lying about not reading it?

@Shai Oh absolutely not - I remember reports out of his last administration of him not spending a ton of time reading intelligence briefings and other memos people put in front of him. People I know who have read the Project 2025 doc have characterized it as being a slog, so I doubt he'd see something that big and read all of it. I do think Trump probably has SOME level of knowledge about it, but only to the extent that it's been summarized to him by aides and other people around him

It kinda looks to me like it isn't visible in his Time Person of the Year cover, does anyone agree? His face is a uniform non-orange skin colour that matches his hands

compare for example

or

working criteria: it's not visible on him in multiple consecutive well lit public appearances over multiple weeks

Obviously per my given criteria one pic isn't enough and his term hasn't started yet, but there's a chance he might do it again

@TheAllMemeingEye I think it may just be that they muted the colors for the cover tbh

@Bayesian Arb opportunity

@CS2 what if he literally says the words, “the n-word” like here:https://youtu.be/RL17-2yi9wE?si=z4xndISpGYNHPQN2

@LiamZ No it won't count

@Marnix is this about adults' access?

@Siebe Yep!

@Siebe is 25% a lower bound or an upper bound? or is the dash intended to be a minus sign?

I’d appreciate if you clarified like “Total NIH funding in 2024 ≤ 0.75 × min(funding for any previous year)” or similar

@KimberlyWilberLIgt good question, I clarified here

https://manifold.markets/Bayesian/what-will-happen-during-trumps-seco#wuuhfzskrgb

but yeah, I'll make the text clearer too

@Siebe @Bayesian can you edit it to:

NIH funding in any year ≤ 75% NIH funding in 2024 (inflation-adjusted)

@Siebe pardon, isn’t that equivalence backwards? Your other comment seems to say “funding in 2024 will decrease by at least 25% below the previous low”

(sorry for being nitpicky lol)

@KimberlyWilberLIgt no it's not. 2024 is the reference year and not part of Trump's second term. The question is whether NIH funding will decrease significantly (at least 25%) during Trump's second term as compared to 2024

@Siebe ohhh yup yup

If you guys would like to add some more options

@Yann does this mean no new funding? Or zero long covid funding by the NIH?

@Phill does being HHS Secretary count?

@Siebe ummm... interesting, someone should have clarified this earlier. It should, I think?

@Siebe I'd say yes since Google says: "Yes, the HHS Secretary has direct authority over the FDA. The FDA Commissioner reports directly to the HHS Secretary, as the FDA is one of the 13 operating divisions under the Department of Health and Human Services. The HHS Secretary has the authority to overrule decisions made by the FDA Commissioner. "

Can't think of an argument why it should not be yes.

What are the odds that he wears a shirt during the tape?

@Phill Is this referring to the GOP primaries in general (including for congress, governors, etc) or just for the presidential primaries?

@UnspecifiedPerson oh man, I was thinking about the presidential primaries here, but the wording says GOP primary, which means it has to include congress, governors etc. I hope nobody feels cheated by this clarification