Who will the polls say won the debate between the two? Will resolve based on credible polls post-debate regarding this specific question. Credible polls are those using a large sample, scientifically valid process and have a pollster rating of 1.9 or higher on 538 (which is about 100+ pollsters). Examples include CNN/ssrs and you gov snap polls and Ipsos poll, which all did polls regarding the winner of the presidential debate and meet the criteria. I plan to resolve within 48 hours if all the snap polls show a clear winner. If the winner is less clear, I will wait 10 days to see if any additional polling is released to make it decisive. I will not include any party or SUPER PAC pollsters, unless they have a rating of 1.9 or higher on 538. If 1) there is a truly split polling result among credible polls (i.e. two polls show Vance won and two show Walz won) or 2) all poll results are within the polls stated margin of error and don't show a clear pattern (e.g. Walz +2, Vance +3, Walz +1), I will declare it a tie and resolve 50-50 or void as N/A. For example, the Margin of error for the CNN/ssrs poll was +/- 5.3 points. If the polls are within the margin of error but all point in same direction (e.g. 3 polls with Vance +4), I will consider that a Vance victory.
If there is no debate or there is only 1 or no polls that meet the criteria, I will resolve n/a and return the funds. If there is more than one VP debate, this will resolve based on the FIRST one.
NOTE: Edited 10/1 to be clearer on resolution criteria.
1,000
1.00Please consider pre-committing to a resolution criteria.
One possible rubric:
1. Use an average of all snap polls from CNN, Ipsos, Morning Consult, YouGov, Red Eagle Politics available 48 hours after the debate.
Note: Red Eagle Politics is a Republican sponsored poll but it was middle of the pack for polling of the Harris/Trump debate.
2. I'd exclude any outlet sampling fewer than 30 people. For example, Washington Post also conducted a poll of debate watchers that was in line with other results, but it used a very small sample of 24 people. (If it's unclear, you can assume the above outlets used robust samples like they usually do.)
3. I would allow 2 days for polls to roll in then take the average of whichever are available at that time. That probably drops Ipsos, who took 5 days to report last time, but most of the snap polls will be published within 24 hours.
4. I would void the question if the results are within +/- 2%. That's just noise.
5. I would also void the question if fewer than 3 separate outlets produce poll results on the outcome.
@p_journal I'll apply this rubric for a question about the spread here:
https://manifold.markets/p_journal/what-will-be-the-spread-of-the-1-oc?play=true
@p_journal Thanks for the post. I have addressed a few of these in comments, but you raise some new points too. Here our responses to your post:
1)I plan on using snap polls from reputable firms like you mention. CNN/ssrs and you gov did presidential debate polls and I expect/hope they will do one for the VP debate. I will not be using any party-sponsored/SUPERPAC polls, unless they have a proven track record, by having a 2 or above on 538's pollster rankings.
2) Absolutely, any small polls like 30 people will not count as they don't meet scientific polling standards
3) If the snap polls are all decisive, then I will resolve after 48 hours. If there is not a clear result (a split from what is released or all in margin of error), then I am going to wait a week for longer polls to release their results to see if it makes the result decisive.
4) Any polls within their own margin of error will be considered a tie, though if all are within margin of error but show a clear pattern, I will resolve in favor of the pattern (for example, if 4 polls all showed Vance with a +4-5 PT win, I would consider that a Vance win. One by itself being in margin of error is not enough to make a call, or if the polls were split in direction, or all very close, like all showing Vance +1 or tie, then I would consider that a tie and void).
5) I am going to resolve if at least 2 scientifically valid, large sample polls show a winner. I am not confident we will see more than that for a VP debate, but I think 2 polls confirming the same thing will be sufficient.
@JRR Thanks, that sound perfect and well thought out, sorry for the duplication.
"unless they have a proven track record" -- yeah, only mentioned Red Eagle because they made the cut for the 538 calculus last time. Using the pollster rating seems like a really smart way to do this.
Should be interesting. Vance is pretty wonky and well read but can be awkward. Best case, he keeps the debate about facts and figures and gets Walz off balance, coming across as better researched. But Walz has more natural folksy charm and is more down to earth, which is historically powerful for national audiences. Walz also has Pete helping him prep, who generally did well in debates and frequently engages directly with the other side.
@JRR We'd like to make this into a sweepstakes market. Could you update the description with a more detailed explanation of the polls you will use and what would happen if it's a tie (it should resolve to 50-50 instead of N/A) and how exactly you would determine it is a tie.
Thanks! If you don't have the time to do so in the next hour or two we will probably just make a new market for the sweepstakes.
@ManifoldPolitics Just updated. Let me know if this covers everything or you would like anything else addressed. Thanks and happy to see this getting boosted to sweepstakes!
@JRR It's much better but still a bit concerned about an outcome where it's very close. Should have a more specific definition of "margin of error". Or maybe name a few polls you will take the average of (and if it's within 48-52% then it resolves N/A for mana and 50-50 for sweepstakes).
@ManifoldPolitics Uff, just found out that these "special-wrapped" binary markets aren't supported yet to turn in sweepstakes. We are going to have to make a normal binary market for today. Sorry to have misled you @JRR 🫠 Sent you some mana
@ManifoldPolitics ah OK, that's too bad. Thanks for letting me know. Probably good to get the resolution criteria hammered out in the description for this one anyway
@PlasmaBallin I'd put it 60/40 rather than 75/25 - Vance is a more agile debater than Walz, if you look at their past performance.
@MattP Why do you still favor Walz, then? Is it because he's more charismatic and more popular before the debate?
@PlasmaBallin it's mainly because the incentives of the majority of the legacy media folks who are reporting on the debate are to pump Walz and trash Vance. I think if you put em side by side, Walz is probably slightly more charismatic - but I think people overrate that.
"He also said he was a bad debater." https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/06/politics/tim-walz-inside-harris-vp-pick/index.html