In past elections, the shortlist for a presidential candidate's running mate has often leaked to the press. This question assumes that Donald Trump will announce a running mate for the 2024 election, and that a final shortlist of his possible choices will be known at some point before the end of the year. If we don't get a shortlist before the end of the year, all options in this market resolve N/A except for his actual VP pick, which will resolve Yes.
If we do get a final shortlist, all names on that final shortlist will resolve "yes" and all others will resolve "no". I may wait as long as the end of the year to be sure that this market resolves on the most accurate and final shortlist.
In cases of ambiguity, Wikipedia will be used as the final arbiter of who was on the final shortlist. They have articles for past VP selections, which you can find below:
In most scenarios, I would expect Trump's shortlist to leak sometime before July, for Trump to announce his pick shortly after, and then for this market to resolve after his pick is announced.
Note that this resolves only to FINAL shortlist. It's normal for us to get early reports of people being considered, but then for us to later learn the list has been narrowed down to just three or four people. If that happens again, this only resolves to those few people being considered before the final choice is made.
1,000
3.00@Joshua I think this can resolve now? There was discussion below at the time of the announcement about waiting a bit to make sure the wikipedia article didn't have a final update. But it's been a few months, should now be stable.
Marco Rubio has denied having been vetted, and mocked by Trump in the past, which may be why he was overlooked by traders until @Joshua‘s comment reflecting that he has been identified in the media as a “finalist”.
I don't want to resolve on leaks, I think we should get a lot more detail about the selection process after the choice is announced. I'd probably give it a few weeks but not more than a month for those stories to come out and if Wikipedia is stable at that point then I'd say it's safe to resolve.
The goal is to avoid scenarios where we resolve on a leaked list of 6 people and then a week later Trump says that the final shortlist was just two people and Wikipedia updates to just list those two people.
This market seems very mispriced to me right now but I suppose I will stop trading here since some judgement calls may be required. But if we did resolve right now, it would be to the "finalists" section which on Wikipedia right now is:
I don't know why anyone but those three is as high as they are right now unless you're expecting the finalists to change.
Right but see the end of the market description:
Note that this resolves only to FINAL shortlist. It's normal for us to get early reports of people being considered, but then for us to later learn the list has been narrowed down to just three or four people. If that happens again, this only resolves to those few people being considered before the final choice is made.
@Joshua i don’t think that shortlist of 3 is actually legitimate, tbh! Since then, there have clearly been additional candidates vetted (Youngkin at the very least, as well as Tom Cotton and also a reevaluation of Ben Carson, according to various news sources?)
Although I’m not complaining, since that criteria would help me mana-wise
I think we’re collectively overestimating the chances Republicans try to make party history when we’re already past peak DEI
https://manifold.markets/aashiq/will-the-republican-nominee-for-vic?r=YWFzaGlx