Updated description: If for whatever reason the Democratic nominee changes this question will be about the new nominee.

@bagelfan more than 2m Americans have already voted. More than 440k have voted in just one state.

@becauseyoudo It’s very very unlikely but questions should ideally deal with foreseeable edge cases.

@bagelfan lol, someone getting afraid of Biden saying he's back in?

Missouri

@DaEpicFirestar Why would Missouri be any more likely than Florida or Texas, let alone North Carolina?

@DaEpicFirestar Missouri is Trump +20 or so this year. Trump +15 is the floor.

@DaEpicFirestar Bet on it:

https://manifold.markets/ManifoldPolitics/which-party-will-win-the-us-preside-1ccd026993f1

@BrandonRoney is right. This is an NC market. We need a market on how many states she flips.

@ScottSupak You guys can bet here on "whether this is a NC market" (in the sense that if it's "a NC market" then the market I just created should trade at around 0.

https://manifold.markets/EricNeyman/will-kamala-harris-lose-nc-but-win?play=true

@EricNeyman good idea for a market, and of course it's possible--especially now with the disaster possibly affecting the election--that another state could flip while NC doesn't, and my tone is only meant as a suggestion that the price should be low, and your market is priced pretty well at 8c.

This is at almost 53% according to Nate Silver's model. ~13% of that comes from states other than NC (NC is at ~40%)...his model seems bullish on Harris' chances in Florida and especially Alaska, so probably the 13% comes mostly from those states.

@Nightsquared That is the wrong way to think about this market. How many universes are there in which NC goes red and another Solid R state like FL, AK, or IA goes blue? That's like maybe on the order of magnitude of 1 in a 100 or 1 in a 1000. Not happening. The equation is that probability plus p(Harris wins NC). So essentially p(Harris wins NC) is the market value here.

@BrandonRoney I mean, I mostly agree, but Nate Silver's model doesn't. I get the impression that these models give too much credence to bizarre outcomes, but who knows.

@Nightsquared Nate Silver is pretty overrated. Its too dependent on weights of polls that have awful records when Trump is on the ballot.

@Nightsquared No, actually you just don’t understand Nate Silver’s model.

@Nightsquared I didn't think Nate Silver's model gave a probability of Harris flipping a state.

@PlasmaBallin

"Harris wins at least one state Trump won in 2020"

@Nightsquared I think the "Harris flips a state but loses NC" probability is coming mostly from Alaska. I don't have access to the model any more, but last time I did, it had Alaska at ~25%. And it has the weakest correlation with other states.

@Nightsquared I stand corrected. Didn’t think he would be that dumb

@PlasmaBallin Do you think Nate would take a Harris Alaska +400 bet?

@BrandonRoney not really, the NC market has Harris’ chances at 45%. Right now, this market is at 51%; of that, 45% comes from Harris flipping NC (and maybe another state), and 6% from Harris flipping another state but not NC.

@BonjTwo Not only is NC mispriced, but that 6% is overpriced. That is my entire point.

@BrandonRoney https://manifold.markets/Nightsquared/will-kamala-harris-flip-a-state-but-v6ddgu13hj?play=true
I have a limit order at 1% which you can take if you think this is definitely not gonna happen.