Resolves to the political party of the winner of the 2024 US Presidential Election, as decided by the below market, unless the winner runs as an independent (ie, does not get nominated by either the Democratic or Republican parties).
In that case, regardless of the candidate's party affiliation, the market will resolve Other.
Manifold Politics reserves the right to add additional answers to this market, in case that appears helpful, but all such answers can be bet on currently by voting Yes on Other.
Related questions
It's so depressing that this isn't a landslide for the Democrats. Trump was the most disliked President in decades, tried to change electoral votes to make himself the winner, encouraged his followers to violently attack our elected representatives, and has threatened to defy/terminate the Constitution itself, and voters are like "Yeah that's all fine with me, as long as he abuses his power to hurt those evil woke far-left radical Democrats!"
I do think Harris seems like the candidate made in a lab to do as badly as possible with Rust Belt white working class voters, but idk. Far-left positions such as defund the police/Green New Deal/abolishing ICE, less working class economic policies than Biden, San Francisco liberal, weird laugh, etc. Racists/sexist voters also exist.
@backtowhere The laugh isn't just joking. Sometimes it's in response to serious questions: https://x.com/RNCResearch/status/1816188767809704417
That's wild. The govtrack methodology is slightly janky, but also, I think part of the problem is she was in the minority party in the senate when Trump was president, which isn't exactly a typical environment for a freshman senator! Also, according to govtrack, she's still to the right of Sanders, so "second most liberal senator" would be more accurate. Regardless, I don't think that's actually meaningful. I would say her policy positions probably would put her ever so slightly to the left of the average dem senator currently.
@benshindel Other trackers such as DW Nominate suggest the same thing. She was the most liberal Senator in 2019 which is now deleted (though second most liberal in 2018). She is on record supporting the Green New Deal, abolishing ICE, defund the police, etc.
Biden was around the median Democratic Senator, and Harris is way to the left of that.
@riverwalk3 She certainly did co-sponsor green new deal legislation, but I don't think it is at all accurate that she is "on the record" for abolishing ICE or defunding the police. She danced around questions concering both of those topics, certainly, but there's nothing resembling any sort of "endorsement" of those movements, let alone any concrete policy proposals to those ends. I was able to find a couple videos of her as a senator fielding questions about defunding the police. Both times she redirected it into reasons to fund education and healthcare.
The fact that she hasn't taken her big new introduction week in the spotlight to moderate hard to make a good new first impression on all the swing voters she'll need is a bad sign. Harris is acting like she believes the mobilization myth.
This was her big opportunity to reinvent herself as a safe, unthreatening figure in contrast to a wild Trump. Instead she's just letting her opponents tar her as a radical leftist. Her protestations to the contrary will ring much more hollow once she only starts to defend herself much later. She's wasting a big chance that she'll never get again.
@Tripping i have precisely the opposite impression of her first week; I think one’s opinion of what she’s been up to is heavily dependent on your information sources
@Tripping think about what she has done since Biden stepped down:
-leaked a list of VP candidates from the moderate wing of the party
-given stump speeches touting herself as a prosecutor and Trump as an unpredictable and chaotic criminal
-condemned protestors for burning American flags
-focused by far the most heavily on abortion as an issue in her public massaging
@Tripping You’ll also notice that on prediction markets (lol) her chances have been steadily rising all week, implying that whatever she’s been doing has been working!
She could be touting the Biden-Harris administrations record on fossil fuel production - the US is currently producing more oil than any nation ever in the history of all nations, and she could be talking about how proud she is of that and committing to continuing cheap energy abundance. She could be leveraging her background as a prosecutor to emphasize the importance of tackling normal street crimes and her belief in the importance of law and order and the safety that everyone should enjoy. She could be talking about how she supported the bipartisan border bill and how important passing legislation is to fixing the border, and how much more secure the border would be right now if Trump hadn't killed the bill in a selfish, destructive, tantrum. She should be throwing out generic platitudes about the importance of the private sector and business. Maybe she could talk a bit about deficit reduction.
There are a lot of options for places where she could stake moderate ground. It would be difficult to do everything all at once but by now she should have picked at least 1 thing to publicly moderate hard on, to at least neutralize it as an issue in the future. It would be much easier to do it now than later when she's backed into a corner. If she doesn't win over the swing voters who care about this kind of thing and are worried she's a loon on these issues, she's going to have a lot of trouble winning the states she needs.
I think the idea that moderating means trying to find middle ground on positions that the republican party is stronger with (like the border, crime, economy, etc) is misguided, in my opinion! Raising the salience of those issues would be a mistake for her.
Kamala is (as she should be) raising the salience of issues that she is already "moderate" on. These are things like abortion rights, the vague notion of "democracy", being a "normal American", the idea that women should be in positions of power in the government, healthcare, etc! These are issues that the median voter believes democrats are stronger on, and where she can draw a contrast with the more extreme views of Trump.
An example of Kamala NOT moderating would be if she leaned heavily into causes like I/P, cutting fossil fuel use, DEI initiatives and even things that are not super unpopular but don't have great salience for dems, like raising taxes on the wealthy, trans rights, and school choice.
>Kamala is (as she should be) raising the salience of issues that she is already "moderate" on.
That's what I said! I didn't tell her to find middle ground on positions that the republican party is stronger with. I suggested she talk about her already "moderate" positions on those issues, just like the other issues you raised. The US under biden-harris is already the most oil-producing nation of all time, including the US under Trump. The border bill was actually already supported by Harris and killed by Trump. Crime is historically low and Harris' history is as a prosecutor who even wrote a book about tackling crime. The state of the economy is super low unemployment with inflation down to 3%. These are existing true facts about the world and her positions.
I agree that she shouldn't raise the salience of issues where her stance would be unpopular, like I/P, DEI or trans rights. But the border, or the economy, or crime, or energy are not like those issues - she has a good hand but she needs to actually play the cards.
>There hasnt been a single issue this week where she came out on the far left on.
That's a ridiculously low bar you're setting up for her. Unfortunately her image isn't dependent on that, she needs to be proactive in presenting a moderate image before all the swing voters see a montage of all the stuff she said during the 2020 primaries.