Vice President Kamala Harris and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz will sit for a joint interview with CNN on Thursday, the network announced Tuesday...
It's the first formal interview for Harris after more than five weeks of campaigning. That long delay means she'll be under additional scrutiny for her performance in the CNN interview. (Axios)
These options resolve YES if Kamala Harris says the exact sequence of words during her upcoming CNN interview.
Currently, Tim Walz is scheduled to included in this interview as well.As indicated by the title, this market only resolves based on what Kamala Harris says.
If CNN does not release an interview featuring Kamala Harris before September 10th, all options resolve N/A.
This market only requires that it be an interview with Kamala Harris on CNN (it doesn't matter if it gets delayed a few days, or whether Tim Walz is included).
This will follow the same rules as the original Trump-isms Debate Megamarket—see the original market for more detailed resolution examples.
You can add your own responses, but note (1) I intend to be strict with resolution (following the rules below), & (2) I reserve the right to edit all entries to better match the spirit of the market.
Resolution might take a few days because I'd like to consult the transcript (& I will be traveling the day after the interview).
This will likely close before the interview airs to return liquidity to submitters.
Resolution examples:
Needs to be exact same words (in order): "laughing at all of us" does not count for "laughing at us".
Needs to match tense & pluralization: "winner", "won", or "winnings" do not count for "winning", and "Project 2025's ideas" doesn't count for "Project 2025".
However, any punctuation is fine ("Billions! And billions..." counts for "billions and billions"), and contractions count as the expanded words ("what's" is equivalent to "what is").
An abbreviation is its own word: "MAGA" does not match "Make America Great Again", "LGBT" does not match "LGBTQ".
Different ways of transcribing the same word count: "January 6th" matches "January sixth".
To add flexibility to an answer, use parentheses or an "or". So " 'Free lunch(es)' or 'school lunch(es)' " matches "free lunches", "school lunch", & etc.
1,000
3.00@traders I resolved the YES options that I saw, based on the transcript & recording. I plan to resolve all other options NO—please LMK if I missed any (I'll wait a bit to give people a chance to point any out).
TRIVIA!
Not Manifold's most calibrated performance (to be fair, this was a 48 hour, low liquidity market). If these resolutions hold:
Biggest YES whiff—"Trillion(s)", at ~30%.
Biggest NO whiff—"Project 2025", at 88%.
The debate is next.
i should probably drop all my limit orders so i don't get burned again if more clips out but that'd be a lot of work lol
This market closes in 3 hours, but don't worry, you can get your TV betting fix with EMILY IN PARIS 🇫🇷 🥖—another brave American woman navigating the treacherous waters of toxic men & international geopolitics:
btw, as usual, I won't be resolving these live, because it's very easy to make a mistake without double checking the transcript/recording (if mods want to do so, they are welcome to, but imo it's not needed).
if the transcript/recording are available tonight, i should be able to resolve it then. otherwise, it might take an extra day or so, as i'm traveling (but won't be long don't worry)
@regularhumanbartender Tweaked this from ["We are not going back" or "We're not going back"] -> ["We're not going back"], because under the rules contractions count as the full expansion (i.e. these are equivalent) and I didn't want people doubting that for the other options.
@Slackhammer can @mods N/A this? adding "The" isn't in the spirit of the market, and makes sort worse, because now sorting by highest always displays the nonpredictive addition.
(It was changed to a valid option, but people had already bet up “the” to 99%, so that doesn’t work. Feel free to resubmit the valid option as a separate option!)
@Slackhammer "There's no there, there" is a fine addition to paid to add it myself, if you want it in there (just needs to start with a fresh probability)
@Robincvgr Sorry, but this doesn't follow the spirit of the market. All submissions have to be exact words or phrases. if you want to specify exactly what euphemisms for abortion you want to count, I can edit this to fix the answer, otherwise I'll ask mods to N/A!
(I'm sure there will be a prop bet market for open-ended questions)