Trump seems to be winning. What should his campaign be doing to ensure he continues winning? Submit your own answers, and you'll get trader bonuses when others trade on them.
This market will resolve after the election based on my opinion of what the Trump campaign should have been doing in March onwards to make a republican win more likely. Even if a republican does win, this market will resolve based on what I think they could have been doing now to make that win more likely.
Advice I wouldn't send back in time resolves NO, advice I would send back in time resolves YES. If it's a really tough call I may resolve an option to N/A, but more likely I would opt to resolve to NO if I'm not sure.
Please submit only a single piece of advice per answer, ideally one sentence.
Try to keep advice strongly worded, like telling Trump to do a lot more or a lot less of something instead of slightly more or slightly less. Don't submit "keep doing what you're doing", I've got one option to cover that already.
Be aware of trade-offs in your advice. If you tell the campaign to focus more on one thing, it means they'll focus less on other things.
Keep the advice unambiguous, requiring no clarification in the comments. All the information should be in the option itself.
Please try to avoid duplicating other submissions. I may N/A submissions for quality control.
While this does resolve to my opinion, I will probably take a very outside view approach to resolution. If respectable political analysts like Nate Cohn and David Shor all say that "Trump should have done X" or "Trump did X and it definitely helped him" then I will probably resolve the option "Do X" to YES. If you want a model of my own biases nonetheless, imagine that I am Barack Obama.
Note that any advice to the Trump campaign would also be counted as advice to anyone else who hypothetically replaced Trump as the nominee.
I'm setting the resolution date for December, but may postpone if I still want to wait for more thorough postmortems, like this one.
These rules should be considered to be in Draft Form until this disclaimer is removed. I may update the exact resolution rules if anyone has suggestions for improvements within the spirit of the market.
I will not trade on this market.
See also:
1,000
3.00@JosephBarnes How is that treason? It's not especially nice but doesn't involve anyone the US is at war with (Reagan didn't even get in trouble for doing something similar with Iran and that was a case of them holding american hostages).
@Joshua This market resolves on your opinion, so the people are betting on what they think you’ll think
@AxelJacobsen I suppose I should shepard things in a more serious direction by N/A-ing some of the sillier options. Trump is not going to extend the IP conflict to win the election, nor is it useful advice to tell him to have a good lawyer.
@Joshua I was just trying to make a joke referencing Nixon's behavior re: Vietnam, and then people bid it up lmao
@Joshua I can resubmit the lawyer market as something more practical like "Spend as much money, time, and effort possible delaying the criminal trials or attempting to have the charges dropped/dismissed."
@ZacParker Is he not currently do that? The idea is to give advice that differs from his current actions, if possible.
@Joshua True, I suppose its possible with hindsight that if/when he's convicted and loses it might have behooved him to spend more on his legal team and less on big rallies and vanity sneakers.
@ZacParker Hmmm, maybe phrase it as "redirect a lot of spending away from X and towards Y", when we know he's already spending a lot on Y?
@ClubmasterTransparent Yeah, just can't be telling him to keep doing something the same amount he's currently doing it
Lag caused repost, deleted
Lag-caused repost deleted. I am so impatient.
@NivlacM Nah, the issue is here that Trump has been self destructing on the campaign trail and the media's just been ignoring it. They're focused on the narrative of Biden being too old, losing his touch, while Trump is legitimately going senile. Placing the two of them next to each other, forcing the media to compare the reality of the two and not the narratives, would be devastating for Trump.
@Najawin Let alone all of his policy proposals that the media has been ignoring, like removing federal funding for schools that require vaccines, or project 2025. Forcing people to confront reality, rather than vibes, would be the worst thing possible here.
@Najawin If it was going to be a repeat of 2020 then probably, but Biden's reluctance to do media appearances the last year or two suggests he or his staff are worried he's a lot less sharp than he was four years ago.
@ShakedKoplewitz ...He's been doing media appearances? Like, he just did an interview with yahoo finance of all places. He's just not doing specific ones. (For various reasons, such as being annoyed with the NYT.)
@Najawin Hm, my impression is that he's done relatively few and only by friendly outlets, but I mostly base this on what Nate Silver said here, I haven't exactly been following myself and I'm not sure how many Trump and Obama did at this point in their first terms
https://www.natesilver.net/p/what-bidens-debate-gambit-reveals
@ShakedKoplewitz Yeah, Nate Silver has gone insane these past couple of years. (Hence why 538 got rid of him.) You can safely ignore what he says these days. (See, for instance, him entering into the "vibecession" discourse and completely embarrassing himself.)
@Najawin if your impulse is to dismiss people who are consistently correct because you don't like what they have to say, I think I'm going to dismiss you, not him.
@ShakedKoplewitz He... Hasn't been consistently correct in this time period? That's the entire point? The vibecession example I pointed to included him misreading a basic graph and then getting snooty when people pointed out he did so.