Currently the All-In guys (David Sacks, Jason Calcanis, Chamath, etc.) have been endorsing and fundraising for RFK Jr. Will any publicly switch to Vivek by October 31st?
Two hosts required to endorse Vivek to resolve YES.
Current list: Chamath Palihapitiya
They should state that they are endorsing Vivek, though the word "endorse" isn't a requirement. It should be a statement that clearly indicates they support the candidate beyond mere curiosity or liking their ideas. However, it doesn't have to be exclusive endorsement i.e. they could endorse Vivek without withdrawing their endorsement for RFK.
1,000
3.00I think I'm going to resolve this market YES in the coming days. People in the comments have rightfully pointed out that this invitation shows that Chamath and Sacks co-hosted a fundraiser for Vivek, which would satisfy the resolution requirements. However, I'm open to someone convincing me that it doesn't actually satisfy the resolution criteria.
I realize I have not handled the resolution criteria for this market the best I could have. If you bet NO and are unhappy with how I handled the market, I'm willing to refund your bet here.
@Akzzz123 the description says “switch to Vivek” and I dont think either of these implies they’re endorsing him over RFK Jr. That said, the market creator just bought a bunch of yes shares and added into the description that they only have to “endorse/fundraise” while the title says endorse… so I’m not buying any more No lol
@Akzzz123 These are really close. The tweet is not a true endorsement. That fundraiser I also wouldn't call an endorsement simply because Sacks held a fundraiser for Desantis the day before, even as he was endorsing RFK. It could be that Chamath is just fundraising for Vivek in the same spirit.
@xyz Can you clarify, do they have to endorse and fundraise? Only endorse? Or only do one of them?
@EliLifland I just did some more research into the question and realized it was underspecified. Fundraising seems to not actually indicate endorsement, I realized, because Sacks was fundraising for RFK and Desantis even though he endorsed Desantis. I'm still optimistic they will switch to Vivek!
@xyz So to be clear they have to state that they are endorsing Vivek over all other candidates?
@EliLifland They should state that they are endorsing Vivek, though the word "endorse" isn't a requirement. It should be a statement that clearly indicates they support the candidate beyond mere curiosity or liking their ideas. However, it doesn't have to be exclusive endorsement i.e. they could endorse Vivek without withdrawing their endorsement for RFK.
@xyz Thanks for clarifying. IMO this fairly clearly goes against the original description which asked if they would “switch” to Vivek but i at least appreciate you adding more details.
@xyz How did you conclude that they are endorsing RFK Jr? Maybe I've missed some other source but the link you've shared only mentions that they've held fundraising events for RFK Jr, yet you've linked that as an endorsement. That's what led me to think that the fundraising would count as an endorsement.
@Ledger Alright, I changed my mind. Hosting a fundraiser will count as endorsement. We're at a tally of 1, with Chamath endorsing Vivek.
@EliLifland Having rewatched the original https://youtu.be/3slYsEzJZoY?si=qjh_Q-Fvsr3BDGCb&t=4445 it looks like at least Sacks only endorsed RFK Jr. in the Democratic primary and he doesn't have a horse in the Republican primary, so "switching" in the Republican primary under the strict sense would be impossible.
@xyz it looks like David Sacks also co-hosted the fundraiser.
@JeremyRay Only one is necessary. Hopefully that clarification remains in the spirit of the question.
@xyz The title says "hosts", not "host". I feel like it should be 2 at miniimum, and tbh all is the most natural interpreation