In a recent Twitter exchange, the VC Keith Rabois called Nate Silver a "buffoon" and claimed that the "minimum" Trump win in FL is 8 points (and 10-14 is "more likely"). In reply, Nate challenged him to a $100,000 bet.
This market resolves YES if Trump wins Florida by >8 points, and NO otherwise.
This market parallels their bet (YES = Rabois wins, NO = Nate wins), but it's separately measuring the same question. E.g. if their bet never happens, that's irrelevant for this market (which resolves based solely on the election results).
The only relevance of the real world bet is that if there are any resolution disputes, the "spirit of the market" is based on the original intent behind the proposed bet.
If the result is close, I will wait to resolve until the official vote total has been certified by Florida (2020 example, announcement & totals)
"Winning by >8 points" is defined as (Trump votes) / (total votes) - ([other candidate] votes) / (total votes) > 0.08 for all other candidates.
Related market: /Ziddletwix/the-grand-keith-rabois-twitter-parl
1,000
3.00Manifold itself owns, manages, & resolves the Sweepcash version of this market—nothing I say has any bearing on how they choose to resolve it.
@DanielGlasscock Traditionally you'd raise and hope your opponent folds, not let them open the pot and call. Unless you're referring to Keith?
@TommyMorriss that's what people say, it seems hard for me to think that by itself was enough to pretty accurately pin down the points difference. People are commonly in echochambers and the vibe they feel around them is not representative of, say, the general voting public
@beaver1 Rabois didn't win anything because when Nate Silver offered to write up a contract Rabois ghosted him. Lucky for Nate Silver that Rabois is more talk than walk.
cosign. anything preventing you from resolving the mana version of this market @Ziddletwix ...i kinda need the mana
@Predictor at least he's willing to put his money where his mouth is. Unlike Mr. Rabois, who ghosted after throwing out the $100K figure.
@LukeW curious to see @benshindel liking this when both he @Ziddletwix talked a big game then backpedalled, then ghosted
@Predictor Nah, he literally said his gut said Trump would win. It’s not like he predicted Kamala with 80+% or something
@dlin007 in what world did i ghost lol. i have more profit in this market than you do? and the most overall profit in the other market? i don't know anything about politics but seems like i did just fine on this one
@dlin007 you declined my bet, and then a week later apparently commented you were still down. i didn't see that, because i get about a ~hundred notifications each day and i don't see most of them.
luckily, you aren't penalized for offering a bet and then someone waits a week to respond. by the time you changed your mind i had changed my mind too! and was betting yes. i made 10k on this market and you made 300m, seems like i handled this question just fine?
@Ziddletwix you did ok, but only after changing your mind from your initial high confidence (given you were willing to bet 50k in the opposite direction)
@dlin007 yes, that's how trading works. what matters is the price when you actually buy, and whether the shares go up in value after that, not like, your initial mild hunch before you've actually placed the trade. you can say what you want on twitter what's the point of a prediction market if you don't use the actual scoreboard.
also, barely the point (i.e. what matters is whether you buy shares that go up), but at the time you were offering me 1:1 odds way above the market price. considering that offer doesn't require me to have a strong opinion on the actual question yet, because I could always hedge with the market itself? that seems too obvious to be worth explaining but just in case