Context:
Resolves to the name of the person who I believe with >90% confidence Bill Ackman is referring to in these tweets.
If I do not reach sufficiently high confidence for anyone by September 15th (i.e. Ackman doesn't reveal who he meant by this), this market resolves N/A.
This market can only resolve to an individual person. If later tweets imply that this was referring to anything that isn't an individual person (e.g. "creating a new political party" or etc), it will N/A.
1,000People are also trading
@i_i hahah, i was actually thinking if there is some validation before answer is posted. Can i delete it ?
TL;DR: IIUC (I ain't reading all 1500 words carefully), Ackman says he'll fund a write-in candidate, and adds:
All of the above is not just theory, as I have a superb candidate who I believe can win who meets all of the criteria, but if I were to say his name or even reach out to him, it would have a negative effect on his candidacy, as I am a supporter of President Trump, and that alone taints anyone I would recommend for many and perhaps most NYC Democratic Party members. So rather than my making suggestions, I welcome yours.
I am guessing this refers to his earlier tweet? So there IS someone he has in mind, but he doesn't want to say the name yet, and is instead crowdsourcing. This means we might never find out the answer, since he claims reaching out to "him" (sorry Hillary!) would hurt his candidacy by association. OTOH, it confirms he's serious about this, and since Ackman talks a lot it does seem quite possible that we'll get an answer.
@Ziddletwix seems that we'd still be able to say with high confidence that any write-in candidate who emerges now and gets a lot of traction is Bill's hero
@nikki oh this one didn't occur to me, could actually be plausible, unless there's a blocker i'm missing