A GOP Presidential debate will be held on November 8, 2023. This market resolves to the winner of the debate, according to CNN.com.
The most prominently featured article about the debate, linked from the homepage and posted the day after its conclusion, will be used as reference. "Live updates" about the debate are excluded. If the article covers "5 winners and 5 losers" or something similar, then the winner must be listed first (or last, if the order is counting down) in the list of winners. As long as (s)he is referred to as the sole or the most prominent winner, the reason is irrelevant, even if all (s)he did was meet expectations and even if (s)he didn't attend. A headline that outright states that a candidate won the debate will be considered to be more prominent than any mention of a candidate in the body text of an article.
The winner will be selected solely from the list of candidates in the market; a most prominent mention about some other candidate will be ignored and the next more prominent mention considered in that case.
If CNN does not post any articles about the debate on November 9, 2023, if the debate is so uncivilized that no article provides an opinion as to who won or lost, or if the debate is cancelled, then all options resolve to N/A.
NOTE: By these criteria, Nikki Haley was the winner of the August 23, 2023 debate and Donald Trump was the winner of the September 27, 2023 debate.
RESOLUTION: This is by far the most difficult of all the debates to resolve.
It is clear that Scott, Ramaswamy, Pence, and Trump did not win the debate, because they were referred to negatively or not at all.
Haley was mentioned positively in one article, but she was not mentioned first in that article, nor was she the only one praised in that article.
Chris Christie was rated as the top performer of the debate in an article "grading the candidates." However, the word "winner" was not used to refer to Christie in that article. Instead, the only use of the word "win" was "won me over," which does not state that Christie was the winner. Christie's name was not mentioned in the headline of the article.
The only article that refers to anyone as a "winner" is located at https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/09/politics/gop-debate-iowa-voters-desantis-haley/index.html. Here, multiple Iowa voters state that DeSantis won the debate. The headline of the article includes DeSantis's name, and this article does not include praise for other candidates.
The only logical resolution for this market, therefore, is DeSantis, because of the following text in the description:
"As long as (s)he is referred to as the sole or the most prominent winner, the reason is irrelevant, even if all (s)he did was meet expectations and even if (s)he didn't attend."
The Christie article did not refer to Christie as the winner, and because being referred to as the winner was a requirement in the market text, the only possible resolution is DeSantis. The prominence of the article does not come into consideration because prominence can only be considered for articles that actually declare a winner.
Although this decision is likely to result in one-star reviews and upset some, I don't believe that a market open for months should ever resolve N/A unless it is completely impossible to resolve, and that is not the case here; it would be unfair to revert a large number of trades from people who fairly bet during that time.
PROP BETS ON THIS DEBATE:
1,000๐ Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | แน1,410 | |
| 2 | แน354 | |
| 3 | แน332 | |
| 4 | แน119 | |
| 5 | แน115 |