
People are also trading
@traders I propose to make this market track how Senators actually caucus. If that's clear in advance, we can resolve shortly after election day. If it's unclear, and especially if Osborn wins and that matters, I propose to wait until the start of the term to see. I propose to define "majority" as "51 seats", not including the VP tiebreak, and "tie" to mean the major parties have exactly equal seat counts. "Other" would then be the remaining cases, where neither major party has 51+ seats, but counts are unequal, such as 50-49-1 with an independent or third party Senator.
I think that's the most consistent reading I can come up with given the lack of details available and existing pricing.
Opinions? Alternate suggestions?
I don't have a position in this market, but my arb bot trades in it and I'm using it for election modeling. My current interest in it is primarily in getting some clean and consistent definition nailed down soon.
@EvanDaniel just for fun, inventing scenarios that will never happen: suppose it's 49-49 with Osborn and Bodnar and neither of them caucus with anyone. does it resolve Tie or Other?
@ZaneMiller or two seats unfilled, or one non-caucusing and one unfilled...
I think putting all the weird things like this in "other" makes the most sense, but that's just my intuition. That is, "tie" is exactly the 50-50 split case. What do you think? I definitely should have caught that edge case when writing my original comment, I've tried to think of enough weird things that could happen this election to include that:
@Riley12 I assume because it's asking about "majority" and not control? It's a little odd but seems like a fine way to write a market.