Moreover, contributions to Biden/Harris cannot be easily (legally) shifted to another candidate. I don't know the ins and outs, but campaign finance law is complicated.
"Campaign committees may make unlimited transfers to any national, state or local party committee. They may also transfer excess recount funds to a recount account of a national party committee."
So the Biden-Harris money could go all go to the DNC, but it does appear you're correct they can't go directly to the Newsom campaign. My understanding is the DNC is limited in how much money it is allowed to spend directly on any given race if it is "coordinated" with the campaign, but a lot of lawyerly tactics are used to classify all but the most unavoidable advertising as "not coordinated", which has no spending limit.
So I think this is more of a nuisance, and an opportunity for lawyers to generate billable hours, than it's a real hurdle.
Though to be clear, I still think the betting markets are overestimating the odds of a non-Biden/Harris nomination.
Could be Biden wins nomination, than drops out, and Newsom is made the effective nominee but not the nominee for betting purposes. I think your conditional estimate of Newsom winning conditional on him getting the nomination is too high.
Interesting. That would be quite a mess, in terms of ballot printing and state/federal election laws. It would unprecedented.
I think betting would generally resolve to Newsom. For example, PredictIt considers the winner: "the individual who receives a majority of the votes of the appointed presidential electors when the Electoral College votes are cast."
Polymarket goes by media calls / inauguration: "The resolution source for this market is the Associated Press, Fox News, and NBC. This market will resolve once all three sources call the race for the same candidate. If all three sources haven’t called the race for the same candidate by the inauguration date (January 20, 2025) this market will resolve based on who is inaugurated."
It's not the spread. His point is that there is a 62% chance Biden does *not* drop out, compared with the 69% chance that Biden is the nominee. It implies a 7% chance of Biden dropping out after the convention. Which isn't that high, and seems plausible enough.
7% doesn't sound that high, but if you frame it as a 7/38 = 18% implied probability that IF he drops out, it will be after the convention, that's definitely way too high. The talk of the town is that even the convention itself is probably too late, it would need to happen before. Actually there's a strong case that right now is too late.
Moreover, contributions to Biden/Harris cannot be easily (legally) shifted to another candidate. I don't know the ins and outs, but campaign finance law is complicated.
I searched this:
"Campaign committees may make unlimited transfers to any national, state or local party committee. They may also transfer excess recount funds to a recount account of a national party committee."
https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/making-disbursements/transfers/
So the Biden-Harris money could go all go to the DNC, but it does appear you're correct they can't go directly to the Newsom campaign. My understanding is the DNC is limited in how much money it is allowed to spend directly on any given race if it is "coordinated" with the campaign, but a lot of lawyerly tactics are used to classify all but the most unavoidable advertising as "not coordinated", which has no spending limit.
So I think this is more of a nuisance, and an opportunity for lawyers to generate billable hours, than it's a real hurdle.
Though to be clear, I still think the betting markets are overestimating the odds of a non-Biden/Harris nomination.
Could be Biden wins nomination, than drops out, and Newsom is made the effective nominee but not the nominee for betting purposes. I think your conditional estimate of Newsom winning conditional on him getting the nomination is too high.
Interesting. That would be quite a mess, in terms of ballot printing and state/federal election laws. It would unprecedented.
I think betting would generally resolve to Newsom. For example, PredictIt considers the winner: "the individual who receives a majority of the votes of the appointed presidential electors when the Electoral College votes are cast."
Polymarket goes by media calls / inauguration: "The resolution source for this market is the Associated Press, Fox News, and NBC. This market will resolve once all three sources call the race for the same candidate. If all three sources haven’t called the race for the same candidate by the inauguration date (January 20, 2025) this market will resolve based on who is inaugurated."
Polymarket has 69% chance the Biden is the nominee, but 38% that he drops out meaning some chance he is both the nominee and drops out.
I think 69/38 is just the difference in bid and ask prices.
It's not the spread. His point is that there is a 62% chance Biden does *not* drop out, compared with the 69% chance that Biden is the nominee. It implies a 7% chance of Biden dropping out after the convention. Which isn't that high, and seems plausible enough.
7% doesn't sound that high, but if you frame it as a 7/38 = 18% implied probability that IF he drops out, it will be after the convention, that's definitely way too high. The talk of the town is that even the convention itself is probably too late, it would need to happen before. Actually there's a strong case that right now is too late.
Newsome is too high.
Although she’s terrible, Harris is the obvious choice if he bows out.
I’m inclined to agree with you on that.