I will resolve this based on some combination of how much it gets talked about in elections, how much money goes to interest groups on both topics, and how much of the "political conversation" seems to be about either.
1,000People are also trading
Wish they'd included Abortion / Reproductive Rights on this survey:
I'm surprised this is as high as ~90%, but I'm not going to bet because I think there's liable to be a lot of resolution bias. Abortion remains an all-consuming political issue for a huge portion of the electorate, to the point where no other issue drives single-issue voters to a greater degree. AI is "new", has more economic relevance, and therefore receives more front-page attention. I am still not convinced that the number of people who will base their vote on AI-related issues will be even remotely close to the number of people who will base it on abortion-related issues.
@Balasar yeah, I agree. I think the political relevance of an issue is better captured by the degree to which politicians say "I can't switch sides on the issue because the the voters base their decision on the issue." By that measure abortion is obviously more relevant.
@Balasar I think the resolver here is reputable! If you believe it to be lower, you should bet that!
@MachiNi Worth noting that Balasar and Benjamin's objections are essentially about the market's title; the resolution criteria are sufficiently clear as to rule out "number of single issue voters" from being under consideration.
@Frogswap the criteria are vibes:
I will resolve this based on some combination of how much it gets talked about in elections, how much money goes to interest groups on both topics, and how much of the "political conversation" seems to be about either.
@MachiNi I believe that's very clear that it's measuring how much AI is talked about and how much is spent on it and not how many people decide their vote based on it. Am I missing something or did you misunderstand me?
@Balasar let’s also not forget that SA is the co-author of AI 2027 so I’m worried there might be a bit of confirmation bias at play.
@Frogswap I think you’re missing something. You can try reading the description again and tell me what sources and metrics will be used for resolution for instance.
@MachiNi I think you're misunderstanding me. I did not disagree with you that the criteria are vague, I pointed out that
>the number of people who will base their vote on AI-related issues
is clearly not an endpoint covered by the criteria
@Frogswap neither Balasar nor Benjamin claimed number of single issue voters was among the criteria. But it’s a reasonable proxy for what’s being measured (which again is hopelessly vague).
@MachiNi When Balasar says
>AI is "new", has more economic relevance, and therefore receives more front-page attention.
they are (somewhat) conceding that the vague criteria have been met, aren't they? They are saying that, even though this may be true, it is not sufficient to satisfy the market title and that their proxy is preferable.
Likewise when Benjamin says
>I think the political relevance of an issue is better captured
He's saying that the proposition described in the title is better captured by this alternative criteria.
Neither of them are disputing that these criteria will be met- they may dispute this, but they haven't done so here. What Balasar calls "resolution bias" is really, by their description, criteria bias.
Sorry for the long reply, but I'm surprised that this is contentious and want to spell everything out.
@Frogswap I agree, the resolution criteria make it clear that "big political issue" is about the level of discussion and investment, not number of ppl with stong opinions. It's also vibes-based but that's a separate, irrelevant point.
Besides that, I also don't really believe abortion is politically relevant at the federal level - I think people have basically accepted that it is and will remain a state-level issue. Yes, politicians need to treat carefully to avoid actively offending their respective bases about the abortion issue, but they don't need to take any substantive position on it. So that makes not a very "big political issue" in the election, by almost any definition
Abortion remains an all-consuming political issue for a huge portion of the electorate, to the point where no other issue drives single-issue voters to a greater degree.
Source? On https://news.gallup.com/poll/1675/most-important-problem.aspx for example, it's at <=1%
I see the way this is going, but I'm stubbornly holding on to my own criteria for this, and will award myself imaginary mana when this question resolves NO in my mind. My personal criteria are more like: How much do people care about it? How divisive is the issue?
For instance: Today Pew Research Center released its "Political Topology" report:
Beyond Red vs. Blue: The Political Typology
It identifies 9 groups of Americans with clustered viewpoints. The differences among the 9 groups are explored in detail in the report.
On the first page of the article? Abortion.
Nowhere to be found in the summary report: Artificial intelligence.
They asked four questions about abortion [1] and one about artificial intelligence [2]. The opinions between groups are wildly different for abortion, and not much different for artificial intelligence. For AI, the only thing I notice is that "Leftward Progressives" and "Faith-First Conservatives" both share a notable dislike of AI compared to the other groups. But, I mean, even there, it's one blue group and one red group.
[1] results for abortion questions
[2] results for AI question
@Tsunombie I think that an issue can be a "big political issue" without having obvious partisan lines.
For example... uh... affordability/inflation was the NUMBER ONE political issue in the last election cycle but there were no obvious partisan lines there. It wasn't like one party was "pro-inflation" and one "anti-inflation" or one thought inflation/affordability mattered and the other didn't. Yet it was still a political issue and a big one.
I don't really see how this political cluster analysis from Pew should have any bearing on this.
@bens Big political issue is not the same as "at least as big a political issue as abortion".
If it's not as divisive, it's likely to fail "how much it gets talked about in elections, how much money goes to interest groups on both topics" part of the criteria as parties usually prioritize divisive issues during elections. I personally agree with @Tsunombie on this one, but it looks like this is going to be another market where we all agree on what happened but end up arguing over what the market means, unfortunately.
@Tsunombie 2028 is a long time from now. How confident are you that your version of the resolution criteria will still lead to a NO by then? We can stick to 2028 Pew reports if you want something concrete.
@placebo_username Interested! Any kind of polling where the question is something about what is driving the vote, or what issues the voter finds most important. I’d probably buy NO down to 30%.
With the Hopes that our World is built on they were utterly out of touch,
They denied that the Moon was Stilton; they denied she was even Dutch;
They denied that Wishes were Horses; they denied that a Pig had Wings;
So we worshipped the Gods of the Market Who promised these beautiful things.