Can a YES buyer explain their reasoning? 50pct seems high to me, intuitively, and I think that there is some outlier bias (a few memorable cases of allegations stick in one's memory more than the negatives do).

They believe the claims that all the sex crime accusations against Republicans are fabricated for political reasons

I've been buying at anything under 35%. He clearly was not vetted at all and if so something that could lead to a serious accusation could have easily been overlooked. If the market was for a criminal charge or a lawsuit with some serious teeth I'd be far less likely to bet, but the fact he was not vetted combined with the fact that everything from a recent and serious accusation with receipts to an unclear situation from his Yale days would resolve this market as YES so long as it gets coverage in the next 2.5 months makes it in my mind worth the risk to invest.

This market is about whether Vance is publicly accused of a sex crime, regardless of whether the accusation is true or false.

Betting this to 100 and then accusing him myself /s

@JeffBerman Would this count? Can the resolution criteria be changed to prevent this?

Edit: Oh, nevermind. "accusation in mainstream print or broadcast media."

Is this a reference to the claim that sex crime accusations against Republican candidates are fabricated to hurt them?

It's a combination of false sex crime accusations plus real sex crime accusations.

What is?

This market is not about Republicans or Democrats, or whether claims turn out to be real or fabricated. It's only about the likelihood of claims being made against one prominent politician.

I'm obviously asking about the inspiration for the market. There is no such market for any Democrat candidate.

I created this market because men are often accused of sex crimes once they rise to prominence. I'm interested in the market prediction. If the Democrats choose a man to run for VP, that will also be interesting. I don't know if I'll create a market around the possibility that a potential Democrat VP is accused of a sex crime, but of course anyone else can.

men are often accused of sex crimes once they rise to prominence

Are they? It would be interesting to see a breakdown of the proportion of politicians that have been accused vs haven't.

This is what makes the market interesting. If you think men are not often accused of sex crimes when they rise to prominence, bet NO.

I did already. I think men are typically accused of sex crimes because they actually committed sex crimes, and if Vance had done so, it would have come out already.

The conventional wisdom is politicians cannot be caught with a dead girl or a live boy; there is no precedent for living room furniture, however.

Seems like Vance will be accused of being a closeted homosexual instead 😁: https://www.dailydot.com/news/jd-vance-applebees-date-with-man/

1. The Daily Dot does not qualify as mainstream media.

2. 'A TikToker claims that he is “99% sure”' is not enough an accusation.

3. Going on a gay date is not a sex crime.

Do you understand my comment?

Is it a crime for a man to be honest about his feelings towards a couch?

The consent of the couch is important

It's important to hold ourselves to a high epistemic standard, even when it is hard- no, especially when it is hard. That is why I am committed to bringing up that Vance probably didn't have sex with a couch whenever his name is mentioned. To be safe, I will even bring it up even if no one else suggests that he did.