America is expected to announce a deal where they lift sanctions and in exchange, they allow free elections.
If the opposition is elected, this market resolves to YES.
If the international consensus of observers, including the Organization of American States, as described by the mainstream media (The Economist, NYT...) say they consider the election was fair and nonetheless socialism won, this market resolves to YES.
Otherwise this market resolves to NO.
I won't bet. This market will require judgment.
Related questions
🏅 Top traders
# | Name | Total profit |
---|---|---|
1 | Ṁ1,231 | |
2 | Ṁ611 | |
3 | Ṁ243 | |
4 | Ṁ221 | |
5 | Ṁ157 |
Feel free to downvote this market, but I am resolving it to NO.
The OAS just called the election rigged. One could argue that all that matters is to have ONE free election this year, this means, if the dictator gets to the negotiation table and they host another election later this year, this market would resolve to YES. But the description clearly has some markers saying we are talking about the regular presidential election.
I would wait a decent bit for the dust to settle. I think there are obviously claims of voting irregularities and transparency problems and such, but I'd wait to see if there's any convincing evidence in the press that the elections were fundamentally unfree. (I believe it's likely but definitely not guaranteed at this point!)
I'm not sure what would be convincing to you, but...
Precinct level data wasn't published. The electoral commission called Maduro's 7-point "lead" irreversible when there were still 20% of votes left to "count".
The entire history of elections in Venezuela since 1999 is dubious to say the least; given what we're seeing now, I think the benefit of the doubt they deserve is really tiny.
That comment was previous to Lula saying he supported Maduro. Some in the Lula's cucks community were arguing the silence was ambiguity so they could negotiate a deal.
@BrunoParga if observers say it was clean, this market resolves to YES.
Ecuador election was clean, despite the incredible violence there
@nikki the government can't assassinate candidates. But it's an infortunate that people are fragile and they die against a bullet. This happens often in modern democracies. See: Robert F. Kennedy 1968 assassination, George Wallace's 1972 murder attempt, or Roosevelt 1912 murder attempt.