This market will close on September 15th and resolve based on the number posted here: https://www.natesilver.net/p/nate-silver-2024-president-election-polls-model
under the most recent update as of 8:59 pm pacific time, September 16th. (i.e., this market closes a day before it resolves)
Nate Silver's election model is currently interpreting polling numbers as being 2 percentage points more favorable towards Harris than they should be, under the assumption that Harris is receiving a temporary "convention bounce" to her polls. If this assumption holds up, Harris' polling average will drop over the coming weeks. Currently, she is at +3.5 nationally, so will she be below +1.5 in two weeks?
I will not bet on this market.
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ367 | |
| 2 | Ṁ237 | |
| 3 | Ṁ178 | |
| 4 | Ṁ87 | |
| 5 | Ṁ69 |
Nate Silver's model is currently applying a ~2 percentage point penalty to Harris' polling numbers, under the assumption that Harris is receiving a temporary "convention bounce" to her polls. If this assumption holds up, Harris' polling average will drop over the coming weeks.
It doesn't affect the market resolution, but this information is incorrect. The convention bounce adjustment does not apply to the polling averages he publishes.
https://www.natesilver.net/p/the-electoral-college-bias-has-returned
@pdw I think the description is fine, because I'm saying the model is applying a penalty, not the polling numbers. Nonetheless, I changed the description to hopefully be more clear:
Nate Silver's election model is currently interpreting polling numbers as being 2 percentage points more favorable towards Harris than they should be, under the assumption that Harris is receiving a temporary "convention bounce" to her polls.
Let me know if you think this is better