Resolves YES if the winner of the 2024 presidential election is the candidate predicted most likely to win by Nate Silver’s model (released today, here) on Election Day. NO otherwise.

## Related questions

This is just the probability Nate's favored candidate wins according to the best calibrated model right before election. If you believe Nate's model is perfectly calibrated, this should be identical to his predicted win probability. If you believe an alternate forecast/market is better, you predict what that forecast will be on the final day, assuming Nate favors the same candidate. In 2012, markets had Obama at 73%, 2016 had Clinton at ~80%, 2020 had Biden at ~60%. I think this election is closer than 2012 and 2020, so 60% seems fair at the moment

Refining my answer to the question of how this resolves if there is a “statistics tie”.

First, note that Silver rejects this term:

A statistical tie would traditionally be based on a margin of error, which is a measure of uncertainty. It’s traditionally accounted for with variance, a measure of randomness within a sample.

Silver’s method is instead to run enough simulations to *control for uncertainty *by factoring it in empirically, e.g. as the probability of a specific outcome, like Biden or Harris or Trump winning given the variability of all the possible factors along that, such as the economy, the Electoral College, global conflicts, etc.

Thus it isn’t meaningful to worry about a statistical tie in Silver’s model.

In the case of a *literal* tie, where Trump and Harris have the same probability of winning down to all significant decimal places, this market would resolve NO.