Major office= (federal) congress, governor, mayor of one of the 15 biggest cities, or winning at least one state in a presidential primary.
Explicitly racist or sexist = explicitly declares it. They have to say something like "yes I'm racist/sexist/believe in discrimination by race/sex" (can be either left or right). Outparty accusations don't count even if convincing (so Trump wouldn't count, nor would a democrat who supports AA but doesn't explicitly declare support for "reverse racism").
Update 2025-06-25 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has provided an example of what they consider to meet the explicitly racist criteria. They stated that politician Zohran Mamdani qualifies based on his statements and actions regarding Jewish and Hindu people. If a politician making similar statements is elected, the market will resolve to YES.
Update 2025-06-25 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator clarifies that qualifying statements must be generally considered beyond the pale.
Statements that reflect a general consensus (e.g., regarding sex-segregated sports) will not cause the market to resolve to YES. An example of a qualifying statement would be calling an entire sex or racial group "assholes".
Update 2025-06-25 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has confirmed that this market will resolve to YES if politician Zohran Mamdani wins the general election. This is based on the creator's judgment that Mamdani's history of statements meet the market's 'explicitly racist' criteria.
Update 2025-06-25 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has clarified that the following is a sufficient qualification for a YES resolution:
A politician leading a chant such as "Hindus are bastards".
The creator also stated that their judgment of a candidate's track record of antisemitism is considered decisive and they are not open to debating it further.
@digory to clarify, this market is referring to things that are generally considered beyond the pale (e.g. calling an entire sex or radical grouping assholes or supporting discrimination against them) rather than generally consensus statements like that.
@TimothyJohnson5c16 yes, against both Jews and Hindus (see e.g. here
https://x.com/OnTheNewsBeat/status/1923610786683027484
)
@traders Recommend you divest from this market considering the contradictory statements by the market creator.
Also worth noting that the market creator has the largest amount of YES shares by a significant margin.
@HenryRodgers What do you find contradictory?
@ShakedKoplewitz Are you certain that you would resolve this YES if Mamdani wins the general election? Or are you still waiting to see?
@ShakedKoplewitz Mamdani doesn't say anything racist in that video (by my judgment, unless I missed something). I.e. the text of the tweet is not supported by the video, so as far as I know the tweet is making up that Mamdani is racist. Do you have other evidence?
@TimothyJohnson5c16 this resolves yes if Mamdani wins the general election, based on both the above clip and his history of statements about Jews.
@HenryRodgers there's no contradictory statements. I took the position a long time ago, and it was known long before this. I also went out of my way to clarify the position about a potentially controversial candidate as soon as he became a nominee.
@EricNeyman the track record of his antisemitism is very long, I am not up for debating it beyond saying that this market considers it decisive in itself. Leading a "Hindus are bastards" chant as shown in the video is also sufficient qualification.
Would it count if someone explicitly endorses the "great replacement" theory?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Replacement_conspiracy_theory_in_the_United_States
@TimothyJohnson5c16 I think it depends on the details. If they specifically say having a non-white country is bad then yes, but it they just say "mumble mumble cultural changes" maybe not.
@JonathanRay no, it has to be someone who explicitly endorses being racist or sexist (if she's backpedaling she's probably officially denying it, at least).
Does it count if the politician says something like "I have some internalized racism/sexism since I grew up in a racist/sexist society, and I plan to change things so kids don't grow up in that kind of society" type stuff? As in, explicitly declaring to be racist or sexist but also declaring that they don't believe in discrimination by race/sex.