🏛️ Harris is the only feasible replacement if Biden leaves the ticket
If Biden is pushed off the 2024 ticket, Kamala Harris is the only feasible replacement: the Biden team controls the delegates, roughly a billion dollars of Biden-Harris contributions can legally transfer only to her, and sidestepping her would offend a core Democratic constituency. No outsider (Dimon, Iger, Bezos) and no governor gets the nod, and there is no time for an open primary before the convention.
⚖ Why this verdict
fully deterministic — evaluate.py replays this from daily closes; nothing below is editable or hand-set
- Window: 2024-07-04 → 2024-10-04 — first mention + 3-month horizon, then the window locks.
- The call: ▼ SHORT DJT (primary play). DJT fell 43.4% over the window → direction-adjusted R = +43.4% (the call made money).
- Benchmark: holding SPY over the same window returned +3.6%
→ α = +43.4 − (+3.6) = +39.8%
— what this call made or lost against just owning the index. This is the number the verdict uses.
Stock-selection read: +47.1% — did DJT move the predicted way relative to the market. The two only differ on a SHORT: this call was right about direction relative to the index but still cost money versus holding it.
- Rule fired:
▶ HIT — R ≥ +10% AND α ≥ +5 ✓ (R 43.4, α 39.8)· PARTIAL — R ≥ +5% OR α ≥ 0· MISS — everything else
- Credit: supporters of a HIT earn 1.0 each, opposers the inverse — this feeds the scoreboard weights. supported: Chamath, Friedberg, Sacks | opposed: Jason
Conviction timeline
bands: green ≥ 65 · watch ≥ 45 · ember ≥ 15
Plays vs SPY · % since first mention (2024-07-04)
Plays
| expression | symbol | kind | relevance | rationale |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ▼ SHORT | DJT | stock | PRIMARY | the Trump-linked vehicle trades as a proxy on the 2024 race; a clean hot swap to Harris re-energizes the Democratic ticket and de-rates it |
Mention log
“I mean, I don't think the process was super open and transparent and democratic, but I don't think they had much of a choice. And I think we've talked about that because too much of the money would have had to essentially been returned.”
“the Kamala Harris de facto nomination that took place over 48 hours, I think was a little bit shocking to a lot of people I've spoken with, that there wasn't a bit more of a process to identify a nominee besides Kamala that effectively the party lined up.”
Who built this conviction
each voice's total force on the score — supports and opposes from every mention, weighted exactly as the replay applied them · share = % of all mention-driven movement
⏳ decay drained -22.2 over the idea's life — that's time passing, attributed to no one
Score events
| episode | kind | Δ | after | note |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| E186 2024-07-04 | init | +40.6 | 40.6 | E186 born by Sacks (explicit_prediction x3) [w=0.97] |
| E186 2024-07-04 | oppose | -12.0 | 28.6 | E186 Jason opposes x2 |
| E186 2024-07-04 | oppose | -10.1 | 18.5 | E186 Friedberg opposes x2 [w=0.84] |
| E186 2024-07-04 | reinforce | +18.7 | 37.2 | E186 Chamath support x2 (new voice) [w=1.02] |
| E187 2024-07-12 | reinforce | +10.9 | 48.1 | E187 Sacks support x3 [w=0.97] |
| E188 2024-07-19 | decay | -1.9 | 46.2 | E188 silent |
| E189 2024-07-26 | reinforce | +8.2 | 54.5 | E189 Chamath support x2 [w=1.02] |
| E189 2024-07-26 | reinforce | +5.7 | 60.2 | E189 Friedberg support x2 (flipped from oppose) [w=0.84] |
| E189 2024-07-26 | reinforce | +5.8 | 65.9 | E189 Sacks support x2 [w=0.97] |
| E190 2024-08-02 | decay | -2.6 | 63.3 | E190 silent |
| E191 2024-08-09 | decay | -2.5 | 60.8 | E191 silent |
| E192 2024-08-16 | decay | -2.4 | 58.3 | E192 silent |
| E193 2024-08-23 | decay | -2.3 | 56.0 | E193 silent |
| E194 2024-08-30 | decay | -2.2 | 53.8 | E194 silent |
| E195 2024-09-06 | decay | -2.2 | 51.6 | E195 silent |
| E196 2024-09-20 | decay | -2.1 | 49.6 | E196 silent |
| E197 2024-09-27 | decay | -2.0 | 47.6 | E197 silent |
| E198 2024-10-03 | decay | -1.9 | 45.7 | E198 silent |