I mean… Nate had Trump at 30% in 2016 which would have resolved NO by this criteria even though 538 gave Trump a better chance than basically anyone.

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

And in the unlikely event they’re tied in his model?

that's a roughly 1 in 40000 chance, but in that case it should resolve to 50%.

If we include statistical ties (49.5% to 50.5%) it's more probable. Perhaps 50% if Nate Silver says its tied (similar to 538 is doing currently)

In the unlikely event there is a statistical tie, that would mean that the model can’t predict who will win.

I think in this case the market should just resolve NO.

Counterpoints?

Predicted as of when?

Market close. Nov 5. Election Day.