https://manifold.markets/persimmon/will-tulsi-gabbard-be-the-next-dire

@persimmon

Polymarket currently at 47%

If she gets approved through recess appointment I assume this resolves NO?

@strutheo I'm also very interested in this question

@MattP what do we think @mods we need a ruling for sweeps markets that might do this

@strutheo IMO the plain reading of the title would be that a recess appointment resolves NO, because she is not "confirmed" in such a case.

A question that would resolve YES in a recess appointment should just say "will X be the next Y?" (rather than "be confirmed as")

@strutheo it's your question, don't ask me. Everyone here seems to be saying, "resolve matching the description you made".

And I can't comment what might happen on a sweepstakes market. No moderator can.

its sweeps so its managed by manifold now , will go based on that

@strutheo only the sweepstakes part is managed by Manifold.

Don't let them steal your autonomy. Be your own creator.

@Eliza on the one hand, I agree the question creator should have a clear opinion on resolution criteria and express that. On the other hand.... wouldn't it be weird AF if a sweeps question resolved differently from the non-sweeps part of the question? I can understand where they're coming from by saying "it's managed by Manifold now" even if the mana market technically isn't.

@MattP idk about you but I'm not letting anyone steal my question and change it. If they want to own the Mana market also they will have to deal with that separately. It still says it is owned by the creator and they are still able to edit everything. And no one ever said they lost control over it.

@Eliza how would you feel if you were betting in a sweeps/mana market and the sweeps market resolved differently than the mana market? I get what you're saying, my position is just that from a practical perspective they can't actually have a situation where they resolve differently.

@MattP If they want to take over both markets it should say they are both managed by Manifold and no longer have the original creator's name on it.

There is no 'rule' that they have to resolve the same. When I pressed about this in September, Joshua indicated that they may very well resolve differently.

@strutheo I would say the spirit of the question is about confirmation, so recess appointment would be N/A. I haven't bet.

@CraigDemel I mean, I would assume that if there's a recess appointment, we can still wait for the confirmation hearings that will happen later, no? unless you think she gets a recess appointment and then never gets a senate confirmation hearing at all? are ppl saying this could be a possibility, or is the senate obligated to take it up at their next session?

@benshindel AFAICT she would have to be confirmed at the beginning of the next session, starting in 2026, which is after the current close date of this question.

@CraigDemel fixed

@strutheo And now we wait...

Of course, there's still the question of what happens if she's recess appointed and then leaves before the beginning of the 2026 season.

@CraigDemel why N/A and not NO?

@CraigDemel yeah, recess appointment is a clear NO

@MattP No, because she would still be eventually confirmed.

@CraigDemel so if she is confirmed why would it resolve as N/A?

@NoahRich I should have said, "would still eventually have to have a confirmation hearing".