According to this years Val Dem Report the US qualifies as electoral democracy but not as liberal democraxy. Am I missing something?

@Yann what do you mean?

https://v-dem.net/documents/43/v-dem_dr2024_lowres.pdf

@Siebe That’s funny because their first map in said report seems to put it in in ED+ colour. Perhaps my phone is not displaying the colours right.

@traders I have made a dashboard for US Democracy questions:

https://manifold.markets/news/us-democracy?r=U2llYmU

Let me know if you want to see any questions added or created

Just spitballing a less subjective definition of liberal democracy:

"If Trump is elected, averaged over the time period of January through October 2028, will there be a >20% of a Democrat or other GOP-opposed party being installed as president in 2029."

Some useful comments on the subjectivity of V-DEM:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/4QfQ7LZMGhjg8xhkX/sieberozendal-s-shortform?commentId=hzoL4MQfShmFCWdpF

If anyone has suggestions for a better measure, I'd love to make a new question for it

@Siebe
This market attempts to reduce to subjectivity of "liberal democracy" by asking whether we expect GOP to have what I call "real control" of the White House in 2029. (Feel free to suggest a better term.)

Answer 1 resolves YES if GOP, through legitimate or illegitimate means, maintains control of the White House through January 2029. Real control happen by winning the 2028 election legitimately, or through illegitimate means like refusing to certify the 2028 election. While I fully expect the losing side in 2028 to claim that they "really won", it should be fairly obvious which side actually holds White House power.

Answer 2 asks if we will expect Answer 1 to average more than 80% over the month of January 2028. This answer provides something an upper bound for the probability of authoritarianism: if the opposition party has more than a 20% chance of taking power next year, the ruling party cannot be said to have authoritarian control.

Answer 3 is used to estimate the opportunity cost of locking your money up in Answer 2.

Do you have any suggestions for improving or fixing this market?

I like this operationalisation! I don't really see the need for question 3 though: there are highly liquid markets on who will win the 2024 election, right?

@GG UK elections, 1 year in advance had Labour at 77% on Metaculus. But I think it's different for the challenger to be so high than for the incumbent.

https://www.metaculus.com/questions/11780/party-leaders-form-government-uk-election/

Yes there's a bit of a challenge in determining how firmly you have a lock on power before you can be called an autocrat. If you set the bar too high, you may exclude certain parties that could plausibly be called autocracrats (ex Nicolas Maduro). But if you set the bar too low, it could include parties that are not autocracies, like the UK Labour party. So 80% is kind of a compromise. Could add multiple options though, like 80%, 90% and 95% thresholds.
Thank you for reviewing my market!

No problem! Let me know when it's made and I'll add it to the US Democracy dashboard.

I would only pick one threshold (80%), because it's already a complex question that might not attract enough forecasters. It'll need a catchy title!

I made this market last week, just poured some boosts and liquidity into it. https://manifold.markets/GG/regardless-of-elections-will-actual#hjzwzmwozz
I originally intended to make some derivative markets about whether power will change hands but it hasn't proven very popular yet.

According to V-DEM, countries like Austria, Greece, Portugal, Slovenia are not liberal democracies. This does not seem to be a high bar.

Hi everyone, I would like to change the resolution criteria to 'the first V-DEM report after his term (i.e. March 2029), which collects data up to and including 2028.'

I think this would be far more in line with the spirit of this question, and would capture any antics with the 2028 election, which is a big factor. Do people agree with this change?

Done.

How does this resolve if Trump doesn't end his term? Whether because he stops being president, he dies, the office changes, or the term limit changes?

Personally I think it would make sense to pin it to the current legal end date of his term, January 2029, regardless of what happens in between.

Still resolves based on the first V-DEM report after his term (i.e. March 2029), which collects data up to and including 2028.'

@Siebe When you say the market will "close unresolved", do you mean it will resolve NA (refunding everyone's mana) or that it will close and remain closed (which locks up mana). Resolving NA if Trump is not elected follows the typical pattern for conditional questions.

@UnconditionalProbability I'll do NA then, thanks!

I have added a companion question

This market shouldn't be allowed unless Trump is already the president.

@YoaaauuIohheee why not?

@Siebe It is a good idea for a market, but you state "If Trump is not elected in 2024, this market will close unresolved." I don't like the idea of a market potentially ending as 'unresolved'

@YoaaauuIohheee I have now added a companion question for if a Democrat is elected. I don't think it since the fundamental issue, which is that it's a conditional forecast, but I hope it helps!

@Siebe If conditional markets' condition is not met, they should resolve 'N/A' (which returns everyones money)