Veepstakes Fundraiser
It appears to be the case that after the Indiana primary Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have effectively sewn up their parties’ nominations. 1 So of course we are all wondering now what signals, stratagems, and shore-ups the nominees will address by way of selecting running mates.
At the same time, we need to raise some money to keep our bills paid. Hosting fees are expensive and there are indications that they are about to increase on us because of a variety of circumstances. So here’s the game.
Above, you’ll see a chart I put together today with what seem like the names getting the most play for either presumptive nominee. The chart is 10 x 10, and divided into ten color-coded groups.
You play by pledging to donate to the site’s operating funds for one (or more) of the groups. You’ll notice that each group contains a unique combination of each of the ten possibilities on each side. To win, the running mates selected by each nominee must match up to one of the combinations in your group.
The winner splits the proceeds 50/50 with the site. If a candidate goes off this board, then the site will keep the funds pledged. 2 I will also write a post on the subject of the winner’s choice; subject need not be specified in advance.
But it’s not quite first come, first served. It’s an auction. The opening pledge for each group is $30.00. If you’re convinced, for instance, that the choices will be Chris Christie and Julian Castro, that’s Group E. If someone bids $30 for group E before you, you can edge that person out by bidding more for that group. But you’re biding on the combinations in a particular group, not just a single combination. So if you were thinking it would be Christie and Castro, and it turns out that Clinton picks Tim Kaine and Trump picks Tom Tancredo, then you’d still win because both combinations are in Group E. But if it turns out to be Kaine and Christie, then whoever was holding Group H would win.
Bidding will stop when the first running mate is announced. That’s when the pledges are due, by PayPal or some other method we work out. The winner will be announced by the candidates themselves.
Make your pledges in the comments thread below. Of course, feel free to argue the merits and strategies of the various VP choices. So here’s your chance to enjoy political banter of the airiest sort and to support your favorite website!
UPDATE: By special request, we’ve swapped out Nikki Haley, who took herself out of consideration, and swapped in John Kasich, who left an opening for God to tell him it would be okay to accept an offer from Trump to be his running mate and thus keep on eating all that delicious food out there on the campaign trail.
- Yes, I know that Sanders got more votes than Clinton in Indiana, but if he continues to beat Clinton by those margins through California, she’ll have sewn up a win thanks to the Democrats’ system of proportional delegate allocation.
- This is a fundraiser, after all. Also, it’s not gambling because there is skill involved — specifically, the skill of political prognostication.
Hickenlooper/Kasich. We’ll set it up tonight.Report
I was under the impression that Kasich had categorically excluded himself from consideration. But in his withdrawal speech he indicated that he was certain God would tell him what to do with the rest of his life, so I guess that’s an opening of sorts.
If there is sentiment to substitute Kasich in for another of the more likely choices, we can do that. I just need to swap out the graphics on the selection board.Report
Nikki Haley just announced that it ain’t her. She just told CNN that her plate is full.
So put me down for F.Report
Is that swap Kasich in for Haley, and then you want group F?Report
Yessir.Report
Updated, and thank you for your pledge!Report
$30 on group A, Giuliani/Castro.Report
Updated, and thank you for your pledge, @michael-cain !Report
I think A was a good call on Mike’s part. But as for me, put $30 on HReport
damnit, Plinko.
$35 on H, then.Report
Now to decide how long I can hold out before re-bidding, lest I drive up the cost up too far!Report
$30 on Gingrich/Brown (H).Report
I’d better put in for I before someone actually names their VP.Report
$30 on Group C Christy/Warren please!Report
Thank you, @aaron-david , @plinko , and @alan-scott for your pledges! (@plinko is currently bid out for for Group H but we’ll see how this game winds up getting played.)
As for me, I’m going to play also, but I’ma give all of you a chance to get in ahead of me. I know where **I** think the sweet spot is, and no one has taken it yet.Report
I am very disappointed that I’m not in a fiscal state where I feel comfortable donating right now, but I like the looks of space I. Perhaps things will change before this campaign concludes.Report
I’ve failed so badly at predictions this season that I’m not going to embarrass myself by even trying to pick a group for Veep. I’ll just throw my normal donation in when it gets set up.Report
30$ for Giuliani/ Kaine.
Maybe by writing it down, it won’t happen.Report
Got it, and thank you for your pledge!Report
$30 on Green. It doesn’t matter who the people are.Report
You’ve actually got some sweet combos in group B, including the combo with both runners-up from the primaries (Cruz/Sanders).
And thank you for your pledge!Report
I’m putting myself down for group G. It has Kasich/Kaine, Huckabee/Heinrich, Cruz/Castro, and Christie/Hickenlooper, which all seem to me to be reasonably likely still (although I understand Christie is making demurring noises right now but we’ll see how things look later).
Remember, bidding is open until the first running mate is announced! Groups E, I, and J are still open, and you can out-bid someone else for a group you prefer.Report
I has been bid!Report
You’re welcome to take your spot back if you want to pay more than $35 for it, @plinkoReport
My runner up choice was I, so I’ll consider $30 on it a fair bet. . . Rick Scott and Newt seem like top candidates to me for Trump and Castro/Brown reasonable choices for Clinton.
As sad/weird as it is, I feel somewhat more confident in the Trump side than Clinton when it comes to the veepstakes.Report
Noted, and once again thank you for your pledge!Report
I’ll take none-of-the-above for $30.Report
Sorry, it doesn’t work that way. If a candidate goes “off the board” and picks someone not on the list, the entire pool goes to the site’s benefit.
We’ll still accept a pledge, though!Report
boo. I’ll take J, then.
can we make side bets as to whether the final pick is on-board vs. off-board? Distribute the losing pool to the winners based on their percent contribution to the winner’s pool and the house keeps a rake of 10%.Report
Well, the house is taking a rake of 50% (it **is** a fundraiser, after all). And at this point there’s a fair number of participants with skin in the game and it doesn’t seem fair to change the rules on them.
But then again, it **is** a fundraiser. And here’s someone who wants to give the site money. It behooves us to accommodate. So hmm. How about this:
If you’ve already pledged for a square, you can make an additional pledge, “off the board” for a specific set of running mates (one for Clinton, one for Trump), for an entry-level pledge of $10.00. As with the group of combinations “on the board,” a specific combination can be “bid up” by other players. If that combination turns out to be a correct prediction, you take half the pot as before. Since the pot right now is $305, that still seems a pretty good ROI should you win. And, of course, there’s the ability to request a post from me.
Whaddya say?Report
Sounds good. I’ll need to think about my pairing.
To be clear, I think you misunderstood my side bet proposal. I was not suggesting taking anything away from the on-the-board bets. I was suggesting an additional bet: will the actual VP nominees be found on the board? As a simple yes-no bet, there would only be two sides. Assume people put in a total of $100 on the no and $25 on the yes. If the no side wins, each $1 bet returns $1.25, less the rake. If the yes wins, each $1 bet returns $5, less the rake.Report
How about this… for a $5 kicker you can buy a chance at winning the entire pool (sorry OT) in the unlikely event that any of your pairs team up for a 3rd party bid.
So, for example, the as yet un-taken Orange boxes would have the attractive possibility of a Cruz/Warren ’16 ticket. Just a thought.Report
Now you’re just being silly.
Which is okay, but I’m still calling it out as silly.Report
come on, folks. We gotta get two more people in this game. I wanna see people getting outbid by someone besides me.
I can’t be the only chump who put up more than $30 bucks.Report
I’m contributing $100 directly to the site, but I don’t have a bet. I’ve been humbled by the Trumpkins in the nomination race and don’t want to hex the important contest by repeating my previous actions.Report
Thank you!Report
You’re welcome, are you going to put up a paypal link or have I simply overlooked it somewhere?Report
Yes, when the time comes I’ll post a paypal link. For now, no one has to actually pony up money because we’re in the “bidding war” phase — until one of the presumptive nominees announces a running mate’s identity.
I’ve heard rumors that Trump will not announce until the Republican convention actually begins, so that’s July 18-21; the Democratic convention is the week after that, July 25-28. But I’d look to the Clinton campaign to do things a bit more traditionally and announce at least a month before the convention.Report
Okay cool.Report
Well, I expect we’ll start getting the phone-in numbers $0.50/dial for eligible Trump VP candidates (hey, he’s got to raise money somehow) about a month in advance too. So that will eliminate some.Report
Group E is still open as of now? (May 11 2:30 pm eastern time?) I’ll take that if so.Report
Thank you for your pledge!Report
As I can’t identify any more than a handful of the listed names whose being a heartbeat from the presidency doesn’t scare the wits out of me, I’m just going to vote OT and make a direct pledge of $50.
Sometimes you get Millard Fillmore, and sometimes you get Teddy Roosevelt. I suspect we’re more on the Fillmorean end of the scale with this list. Doesn’t anyone care about this country anymore?Report
The Atlantic Posts their front runner list for Trump
Man, everybody wants a piece of Sandoval… first the Supreme Court, now VP… would think he has enough on his plate with the Red Sox.
Otherwise, pretty good overlap with your guesses. I’d vote on scrubbing Huckabee and Tancredo for anyone else on the list. {Can Ben Carson *really* be a serious guess?}Report
I tell you what, picking potential Veep choices for Trump was tough. I put Huckabee on the list because Huckabee’s wife happens to be on Trump’s VP selection committee. Which Ben Carson happens to chair. So I don’t think those are totally unrealistic choices — consider the precedent of Dick Cheney serving as the chair of GWB’s running mate selection committee, and look at who he determined was the best choice?Report
You appear to have done better than the Atlantic on one possibility, since you don’t have Martinez of New Mexico on your list. Unless the Donald is planning to say this week that she’s not doing her job right, and then next week tacks on, “so she’ll be GREAT on my team!”Report
There are a lot of rumors, coming from people that like her, that she would not make it through the vetting process.Report
Yeah, don’t get me wrong, I’m impressed with the overlap… given that VP is more of a superhero side-kick and picked more for complementary (if equally fictitious) super-powers (and sartorial sense) than according to any sort of real calculus, I’m not sure how you even begin to forecast.Report
I’m liking Group H, so I’ll bid $40 for H.Report
Awesome! Thank you for your pledge!
I’ll update the graphic tomorrow after my trial.Report
Since group H is getting pricy, I’ll outbid @michael-cain for group A, at $35Report
Outstanding. Thank you again for playing. When shall we hear from @michael-cain , I wonder?Report
“I’m thinking about it!”Report
Chart updated above. As of right now, @michael-cain , you are out of the action!Report
If only I could update my pick to reflect Trump’s obvious running mate this year: Tila Tequila.Report
Every editorial page cartoonist in the universe is rooting for that…Report
$35 on Group E, Christie and Castro. Christie is clearly aiming for it. Castro looks really good in theory, but is bad in practice, which is Hillary’s shortcoming.Report
Done, and thank you!
@kolohe , you’ve just been bumped! Whatcha gonna do about it?Report
I’m going to pass. I do think there’s a non zero chance that Christie will grab Trump and throw him off the dais at Quicken Loans Arena, a la Vader & the Emperor.Report
Nooo! we need eleven people vying for ten spots. That’s how OT, and our lucky winner, will earn the big bucks.Report
$35 on C.Report
Done, and thank you for your pledge!Report
I’ve re-set the date of posting for this post back to the original date (May 4). This will close comments on the original post. You may, however, continue veepstakes trash-talk and bidding at the Veepstakes Update of June 20, 2016, complete with a link to a purported leak of the Clinton campaign’s shortlist that came from two media sources on the same morning. Good luck to all, and thank you again for your pledges!Report