2028 Presidential race: exact outcome
Short Answer
Both the model and the market expect JD Vance to defeat Gavin Newsom in the 2028 Presidential race, with no compelling evidence of mispricing.
1. Market Behavior & Drivers
Based on the chart data, this market is characterized by a stable, sideways trend with very low volatility. The price has been confined to a narrow one-percentage-point range, trading between 8.0% and 9.0%. This trading channel has established 8.0% as a clear support level and 9.0% as a resistance level. The market opened at 8.0% and is currently trading at the same price, indicating no net change over the period shown. There have been no significant price spikes or drops to analyze, as the fluctuations are minor and contained within this tight range.
The total trading volume of 863 contracts is minimal, suggesting low liquidity and a lack of strong market conviction. This light trading activity is consistent with the stable price, indicating that there have been no major news events or shifts in fundamentals to drive significant trading or alter trader sentiment. The market appears to be in a holding pattern, reflecting a consensus that the current probability is fairly priced, or a general lack of interest given the distant 2028 resolution date. The sentiment is neutral and unchanging, awaiting future catalysts that could provide a clearer long-term outlook.
- Republicans show significant net voter registration gains in Florida's Hispanic counties.
- Marco Rubio consolidates substantial Trump donor support for a potential 2028 bid.
- Kamala Harris leads potential candidates in 2026 midterm campaign activity.
- Harris builds substantial infrastructure, transferring PAC funds to swing state candidates.
Who Wins and Why
| Outcome | Market | Model | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gavin Newsom defeats JD Vance | 12.0% | 10.1% | Democratic candidates benefit from significant infrastructure building and PAC funding in swing states. |
| JD Vance defeats Gavin Newsom | 12.0% | 17.2% | Republicans show significant net voter registration gains in Florida's Hispanic counties. |
| Gavin Newsom defeats Marco Rubio | 8.0% | 7.0% | Democratic candidates benefit from significant infrastructure building and PAC funding in swing states. |
| Marco Rubio defeats Gavin Newsom | 7.0% | 10.9% | Marco Rubio consolidates substantial support from major Trump donors for a potential bid. |
| Pete Buttigieg defeats JD Vance | 5.0% | 4.4% | Democratic candidates benefit from significant infrastructure building and PAC funding in swing states. |
2. Price Chart
Historical Price (Probability)
Outcome probability
Date
3. Market Data
Contract Snapshot
The contract resolves to "Yes" if Gavin Newsom defeats JD Vance in the 2028 presidential election, verified by the Office of the Presidency. It resolves to "No" if this outcome does not occur, or if any underlying component (e.g., nominee status) resolves to "No" or becomes impossible, as it operates as a combination market. The market, opened April 9, 2026, closes after the outcome or by January 20, 2029, 5:00 AM EST, with projected payout 30 minutes after closing; it can also close early if the outcome is confirmed or impossible.
Available Contracts
Market options and current pricing
| Outcome bucket | Yes (price) | No (price) | Last trade probability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gavin Newsom defeats JD Vance | $0.12 | $0.91 | 12% |
| JD Vance defeats Gavin Newsom | $0.12 | $0.91 | 12% |
| Gavin Newsom defeats Marco Rubio | $0.08 | $0.94 | 8% |
| Marco Rubio defeats Gavin Newsom | $0.07 | $0.96 | 7% |
| Pete Buttigieg defeats JD Vance | $0.05 | $0.97 | 5% |
| AOC defeats JD Vance | $0.04 | $0.98 | 4% |
| JD Vance defeats Kamala Harris | $0.04 | $0.99 | 4% |
| Kamala Harris defeats JD Vance | $0.04 | $0.98 | 4% |
| Marco Rubio defeats AOC | $0.03 | $0.99 | 3% |
| Andy Beshear defeats Marco Rubio | $0.02 | $0.99 | 2% |
| James Talarico defeats Marco Rubio | $0.02 | $0.99 | 2% |
| JD Vance defeats Andy Beshear | $0.02 | $0.99 | 2% |
| JD Vance defeats Pete Buttigieg | $0.02 | $0.99 | 2% |
| Marco Rubio defeats Josh Shapiro | $0.02 | $0.99 | 2% |
| Pete Buttigieg defeats Marco Rubio | $0.02 | $0.99 | 2% |
| James Talarico defeats JD Vance | $0.01 | $1.00 | 1% |
| JD Vance defeats James Talarico | $0.01 | $1.00 | 1% |
| Marco Rubio defeats Andy Beshear | $0.01 | $1.00 | 1% |
| Marco Rubio defeats James Talarico | $0.01 | $1.00 | 1% |
| Marco Rubio defeats Pete Buttigieg | $0.01 | $1.00 | 1% |
| Andy Beshear defeats JD Vance | $0.03 | $0.98 | 0% |
| AOC defeats Marco Rubio | $0.04 | $0.98 | 0% |
| JD Vance defeats AOC | $0.04 | $0.99 | 0% |
| JD Vance defeats Jon Ossoff | $0.03 | $0.99 | 0% |
| JD Vance defeats Josh Shapiro | $0.03 | $0.99 | 0% |
| Jon Ossoff defeats JD Vance | $0.04 | $0.98 | 0% |
| Jon Ossoff defeats Marco Rubio | $0.03 | $0.98 | 0% |
| Josh Shapiro defeats JD Vance | $0.03 | $0.98 | 0% |
| Josh Shapiro defeats Marco Rubio | $0.03 | $0.98 | 0% |
| Kamala Harris defeats Marco Rubio | $0.03 | $0.98 | 0% |
| Marco Rubio defeats Jon Ossoff | $0.03 | $0.99 | 0% |
| Marco Rubio defeats Kamala Harris | $0.03 | $0.99 | 0% |
Market Discussion
Limited public discussion available for this market.
4. Trust Index
Order book is critically thin.
Primary risk· Trade quality
How it adds up
Integrity80% of score88Strong
Trade quality20% of score24Avoid
Includes the cost to trade: a $1,000 order can't be filled here because the order book is too thin.
Trust score76Good
Weighted blend with hard caps — a critically weak safety pillar, or a severe trading anomaly, caps the total regardless of the rest. Full methodology · About the Trust Index
Trust profile
Integrity4 screens run · 6 don't apply
5. Can Newsom & Beshear's 2028 Fundraising Be Determined?
| Biden/Harris 2028 Nomination Status | No formal announcement made regarding 2028 withdrawal [1], [2], [3] |
|---|---|
| Newsom/Beshear FEC Fundraising Velocity | Cannot be determined for 90 days post-hypothetical 2028 withdrawal [2]. |
| Newsom/Beshear Major Donor Rates | Cannot be provided for specific hypothetical scenario [2]. |
The hypothetical 2028 Democratic nomination scenario has not occurred. Neither President Biden nor Vice President Harris has formally announced they will not seek the 2028 Democratic nomination. While President Biden withdrew from the 2024 presidential election and endorsed Kamala Harris, this pertained to the 2024 race, not 2028 [1]. Furthermore, Vice President Harris has indicated she is considering a 2028 presidential run, stating she is "thinking about it" and knows "what it requires" [2], [3]. Without the occurrence of this specific triggering event, the subsequent fundraising data cannot be established.
Fundraising data for the hypothetical 90-day window is unavailable. Consequently, the FEC-reported fundraising velocity and major donor commitment rates for Gavin Newsom and Andy Beshear within this hypothetical 90-day period cannot be provided. A "DRAFT COMMITTEE SUPPORTING GAVIN NEWSOM FOR PRESIDENT 2024" is listed by the FEC, but this relates to the 2024 election cycle, not the 2028 hypothetical [4]. Similarly, Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear's PAC "raked in $4M in 2025" as he considered a presidential run; however, this activity predates the hypothetical 2028 withdrawal announcement and does not represent the specific 90-day period requested [5]. Therefore, the specific FEC-reported fundraising velocity and major donor commitment rate for these candidates under the defined conditions cannot be determined.
Sources (5)
- 1Biden will not seek reelection; endorses Harris | CNN Politicscnn.com
- 2‘I know what it requires’: Harris on why she’s thinking about running for president in 2028 | CNN Politicscnn.com
- 3Kamala Harris confirms she might run for president again: 'I'm thinking about it'nbcnews.com
- 4DRAFT COMMITTEE SUPPORTING GAVIN NEWSOM FOR PRESIDENT 2024 - committee overview | FECfec.gov
- 5Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear’s PAC rakes in $4M in 2025, as he eyes presidential runwkyufm.org
6. Who Is Winning Trump Donor Support: Vance or Rubio?
| Vance Trump Campaign Transfers | Direct fundraising assistance [1], [2] |
|---|---|
| Rubio Trump Donor Preference | 80-20 over Vance in early 2028 discussions [3] |
| Vance Donor Cultivation | Engaged with conservative donors at events like Rockbridge Network [4] |
JD Vance actively courts significant financial support for a potential 2028 bid. He has received direct fundraising assistance from Donald Trump's 2024 campaign, which has bolstered Vance's political fund through transferred money [1], [2]. Vance has also actively sought support from influential conservative donors, attending exclusive gatherings such as the Rockbridge Network meeting in Nashville to cultivate significant financial backing [4]. Billionaires like Peter Thiel have also shown interest in Vance, indicating his efforts to build a strong donor base [5].
Marco Rubio is gaining substantial support, particularly from major Trump 2024 donors. He is reportedly gathering significant backing from major Republican donors for a potential 2028 presidential bid, with some donors even planning a "shadow 'draft Rubio' 2028 effort" [6]. Crucially, reports indicate that many donors who contributed to Donald Trump's 2024 campaign are favoring Rubio over Vance in early discussions for the 2028 race, with one source stating a strong "80-20 Marco" preference among these key individuals [3]. Newsweek has described this competition as a "MAGA Proxy War" [7].
Rubio demonstrates stronger consolidation among key high-dollar Trump campaign contributors. Although Vance benefits from direct financial transfers from Trump's campaign [1], [2], the current information suggests that Rubio is consolidating greater support among the broader network of major donors who were significant contributors to Donald Trump's 2024 campaign. The reported strong preference for Rubio (80-20) among these influential "Trump donors" indicates his more effective consolidation of the "MAGA wing" of the party in terms of high-dollar donor support and early enthusiasm [3].
Sources (7)
- 1Trump helps pad JD Vance's political fund as questions about 2028 loomnbcnews.com
- 2Trump is kicking some of his fundraising money to Vance — has he picked a successor? | The Independentindependent.co.uk
- 3Trump Donors Reportedly Back Rubio Over Vance in Early 2028 Talk: 'It's 80-20 Marco'latintimes.com
- 4JD Vance appears at secretive conservative donor summit as 2028 presidential speculation grows - CBS Newscbsnews.com
- 5Here Are The Billionaires Cozying Up To J.D. Vance - Yahoo News Canadaca.news.yahoo.com
- 6Some GOP donors plot shadow 'draft Rubio' 2028 effort as his star rises: Sourcesyahoo.com
- 7The MAGA Proxy War That Could Determine 2028 - Newsweeknewsweek.com
7. Are Republicans Gaining Voters in Florida's Hispanic Counties Post-2024?
| Net Republican Gains (FL) | 103,500 (since 2024 election, up to April 2026) [1] |
|---|---|
| Counties with Net GOP Gains | 16 out of 20 largest Hispanic counties in Florida [1] |
| Miami-Dade GOP Gains | 21,500 voters (since 2024 election) [1] |
Specific data on net registration gains among newly naturalized citizens since the 2024 election is not directly available. However, current voter registration data in Florida indicates a significant Republican advantage in net gains among the broader Hispanic electorate and in counties with substantial Hispanic populations [2]. Across Florida, in the 18 months following the 2024 general election up to April 2026, Republicans added 103,500 net voters, compared to Democrats who added 32,800 net voters, and No Party Affiliation (NPA) voters who added 107,300 net voters statewide [1].
Republican registration increased in most high-Hispanic Florida counties since 2024. Critically, among the 20 counties with the largest Hispanic populations in Florida, 16 showed a net increase in Republican registrations, while only 4 showed a net increase in Democratic registrations during this period [1]. This trend is particularly evident in key areas; for instance, in Miami-Dade County, Republicans gained 21,500 voters, while Democrats gained 8,200 voters, and NPAs gained 14,900 voters since the 2024 election [1]. Similarly, Osceola County, with a significant Puerto Rican population, saw Republicans gain 3,800 voters compared to Democrats gaining 2,100 [1]. These shifts build on a longer-term trend, where Republican registration among Hispanic voters in Florida surged by 15 points since 2018, while Democratic registration declined by 9 points, leading to Republicans holding a significant lead among Hispanic residents in Miami-Dade County [3].
Specific voter registration data for Arizona's Hispanic counties is unavailable. Information regarding voter registration trends in Arizona counties with over 20% Hispanic population (e.g., Santa Cruz, Yuma, Maricopa, Pima, Pinal) for the period since the 2024 election, specifically detailing net gains by party or among Hispanic voters, is not provided in the available sources [4].
Sources (4)
- 1April 2026 Voter Registration by Party Updates for Key 2026 and 2028 Battlegroundscaptaink.us
- 2Florida - Top 67 Counties By Percentage of Hispanic or Latino Residentsbiggestuscities.com
- 3Florida’s Hispanic Electorate: A Dramatic Shift in Party Alignmentelectionsmith.substack.com
- 4Arizona - Top 15 Counties By Percentage of Hispanic or Latino Residentsbiggestuscities.com
8. Are RNC Delegate Allocation Rules Changing for 2028?
| RNC Rules Process Start | January 2024 [1] |
|---|---|
| 2028 Winner-Take-All Proposals | None currently proposed [1] |
| Florida 2024 Delegate Allocation | Winner-take-all [2] |
The Republican National Committee (RNC) initiated its 2028 rules process, but specific proposals are pending. The RNC Standing Committee on Rules began considering amendments and making recommendations for the 2028 nominating cycle in January 2024 [3]. However, as of the current status, there are no specific proposals publicly introduced within the RNC Rules Committee aiming to change delegate allocation rules for the 2028 primaries in states like Florida and Ohio to a 'winner-take-all' system [1]. While the rules process has been initiated, concrete rule change proposals have not yet emerged [1].
Florida and Ohio already employ winner-take-all systems. Both Florida and Ohio utilized a winner-take-all system for their Republican presidential primaries in 2024. Florida allocated all of its delegates to the candidate who received the most votes statewide [2]. Similarly, Ohio’s 2024 Republican delegates were allocated on a winner-take-all basis for the statewide vote, and also on a winner-take-all basis within each congressional district [4]. Consequently, any discussions about these states changing to a winner-take-all system for 2028 would not represent a departure from their recent practice. Additionally, the provided sources do not contain information linking any current or proposed rule changes directly to favoring specific candidates [5].
Sources (5)
- 1Republican rule changes for the 2028 cycle - by Josh Putnamfhqplus.com
- 2Delegates - Florida GOPflorida.gop
- 3https://prod-static.gop.com/media/Rules_Of_The_Republican_Party.pdfprod-static.gop.com
- 4Ohio Republican Delegation 2024thegreenpapers.com
- 5Newsweek - JD Vance’s chances of being the Republican... | Facebookfacebook.com
9. Which 2028 Candidates Are Most Active in 2026 Midterms?
| Most Active 2028 Candidate | Kamala Harris (8 campaign stops, $2.5M PAC transfers) [1] |
|---|---|
| Second Most Active Candidate | Gavin Newsom (3 campaign stops, $1.8M PAC transfers) [1] |
| Third Most Active Candidate | Josh Shapiro (3 campaign stops, $1.2M PAC transfers) [1] |
Among potential 2028 presidential candidates, Kamala Harris shows highest engagement in the 2026 midterm cycle. She completed eight campaign stops in key swing states, including one in Arizona, two in Georgia, three in Pennsylvania, and two in Wisconsin. Furthermore, her leadership PAC, "Bold New Leaders," contributed $2.5 million to support 2026 candidates, reflecting a substantial effort to establish a national campaign infrastructure. Harris also held five fundraising events across these critical states [1].
Governors Gavin Newsom and Josh Shapiro also display notable midterm engagement. California Governor Newsom made three visits to swing states, with two stops in Pennsylvania and one in Georgia. His leadership PAC, "Campaign for California's Future," disbursed $1.8 million to 2026 candidates. Pennsylvania Governor Shapiro similarly undertook three campaign stops, visiting Arizona once and Wisconsin twice, and his leadership PAC, "Shapiro for Pennsylvania," transferred $1.2 million to candidates [1].
Other potential candidates exhibit comparatively less activity in swing states. Ron DeSantis conducted two campaign stops and his leadership PAC transferred $900,000. Glenn Youngkin also made two stops, with his leadership PAC contributing $750,000. Tim Scott completed one stop, and his leadership PAC transferred $450,000, while Kristi Noem made one stop, with her leadership PAC transferring $300,000. Greg Abbott and J.D. Vance have not reported any campaign stops in the specified swing states or transferred funds to 2026 candidates from their leadership PACs [1].
