A GOP Presidential debate is being held on September 27, 2023. Debates in previous cycles have been labeled as uncivilized or unbecoming of America. For the resolution of this market, a review will be conducted on the morning of September 29 of all articles posted about the debate on September 28 on CNN.com, excluding "Live Updates during the debate" feeds.
This market resolves to NO if there are more articles that criticize multiple candidates, moderators, audience members, the debate hall, or others involved with producing the debate for uncivil behavior than there are articles praising these people for managing a substantive debate that helped audience members decide who to vote for.
Otherwise, if praise is the majority opinion, if there is equal weight on both sides, or if the debate is so conventional that nobody comments at all about its civility, this market resolves to YES.
The spirit of the question is targeted at the civility of the debate itself. Therefore, excessive personal attacks by a single candidate, which cause controversy over that candidate's actions and which don't degrade the conversation in general, are insufficient to label the debate in its entirety as "uncivilized."
The market resolves to N/A if the debate is cancelled, postponed until after September 30 at 11:59:59pm EDT, or if CNN doesn't publish a single article about the topic on September 28.
See also: https://manifold.markets/SteveSokolowski/will-the-august-23-2023-republican
RESOLUTION: During the August 23, 2023 debate, CNN did not post any mentioning the tone of the debate.
During this debate, the most prominent article that CNN posted stated that Donald Trump won because the other candidates were involved in so many attacks and crosstalk that it belittled them. Multiple other commentators also criticized the candidates for lacking respect for the moderators. Sexual comments by two candidates were also highly criticized.
This time, there were no articles praising anyone for a substantive debate, but there were multiple opinion pieces mentioning the rowdy tone, so the correct resolution is NO.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ403 | |
| 2 | Ṁ205 | |
| 3 | Ṁ151 | |
| 4 | Ṁ128 | |
| 5 | Ṁ94 |
People are also trading
RESOLUTION: During the August 23, 2023 debate, CNN did not post any mentioning the tone of the debate.
During this debate, the most prominent article that CNN posted stated that Donald Trump won because the other candidates were involved in so many attacks and crosstalk that it belittled them. Multiple other commentators also criticized the candidates for lacking respect for the moderators. Sexual comments by two candidates were also highly criticized.
This time, there were no articles praising anyone for a substantive debate, but there were multiple opinion pieces mentioning the rowdy tone, so the correct resolution is NO.
So far, CNN is flooded with critical articles, like "sleeping with a teacher is a new low" and the video that is headlined "moderators lose control" and the article saying Trump won because everyone else just talked over and attacked each other.
I'd probably say the default is NO at this point, unless we see multiple articles that say the debate was civilized before the market close.
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2023/09/28/candidates-interrupt-moderators-fox-gop-debate-cprog-orig-af-mh.cnn
They piled on Vivek with Haley saying he made her dumber with his every utterance. Christie told him to put his hand down. Scott accused him of being a puppet of china and took great offense in last debate where Vivek said he was bought and paid for. But all of that will pale in comparison to the number of articles that will criticize the debate generally for the moderators failing to get any control and allowing a free for all of everyone interrupting speaking over each other and that is why this will resolve as NO.
@AdamTreat Actually, the moderators did a great job getting the debate under control. They cut off people's mics multiple times and even rudely interrupted them when they asked if they could get in an answer. I'd imagine if there is criticism, it will be over the candidates' behavior itself. This market is going to be the closest one of all the prop bets and even of the candidate winners.
@SteveSokolowski There were multiple times where they spoke over each other for long stretches and the resulting "debate" was completely incoherent. Whether that is the moderators fault or the participants or both I'll leave to others.
@AdamTreat I think the standard take is that if this wasn't the system working as designed then the mods would have killswitch buttons for everyone's mics
@SteveSokolowski I watched it live. Definitely thoughts were going through my mind about how I was going to lose this Mana.
@AaronBreckenridge Wow, you do have a lot of mana at stake here. Well, remember that the default outcome is YES if no article claims the debate is uncivilized, so maybe you have some hope.
@peterpumpkin We'll see what the commentators think by the end of the day, but you must have watched a different debate than me. This one seemed far rowdier than the first.
@SteveSokolowski maybe I have a high standard for 'uncivilized'. Would you describe the British parliamentary debate to be uncivilized? They cut each other off and insult each other and the crowd jeers and cheers but I don't think it goes as far as uncivilized.
@AaronBreckenridge idk man--- I saw literally one clip ("skinny guy with a funny name") and it looks like they're students of the trump school of winning, i.e., he taught them last time that they're all competing on crowdwork. They're not incentivized to keep a lid on, and they know it.