OptionProbability
Other
Elon Musk
Bill Gates
Jeff Bezos
Robert Caro
Mr. Beast
Barack Obama
Donald Trump
Kamala Harris
JD Vance
Terence Tao
Sarah Paine
Sam Altman
Narendra Modi
Gwern Branwen
Volodymyr Zelenskyy
roon
Geoffrey Hinton
Ilya Sutskever
Jensen Huang
Peter Thiel
No one, the tweet was a joke or intended to attract advertisers without referring to someone specific
Tim Cook
Satya Nadella
Justin Trudeau
Brian Shaw (_biggest_ guest yet?)
Xi Jinping
Dalai Lama
Buffett
Taylor Swift
Joe Biden
Lebron James
GPT-5
Bill Clinton
A basketball player
Vladimir Putin
Benjamin Netanyahu
Jesus Christ
Rona Wang
Jose Luis ricon
Kettner Griswold
James Koppel
Sam Bankman-Fried
Nancy Pelosi
Rishi Sunak
Keir Starmer
Satoshi Nakomoto
Jimmy Carter
George W Bush
Al Gore
Michael Jackson
your mom
Mitt Romney
one or both of his parents
A new OpenAI AI model not called "GPT-5"
Connor Duffy
MBS
pope Francis
Scott Alexander
The Mountain (Icelandic strongman)
Leonardo DiCaprio
RFK Jr
Sydney Sweeney
growing_daniel
greg16676935420
Deadpool
Shaq
Oprah Winfrey
Yoshua Bengio
Sundar Pichai
Scarlett Johansson
Paul McCartney
[duplicate]
Neel Nanda
King Charles
Kim Jong Un
Gavin Newsom
Royal Palace
[cancelled option]
Daniel Yergin
Peter Singer
Gabe Newell
Neil Gorsuch
Stephen Breyer
Dmitry Medvedev
JK Rowling
Shrek
Sam Hyde
[invalid answer] Multiple people e.g. a team from OpenAI
Marques Brownlee
Vivek Ramaswamy
Donald Trump Jr.
Ben Shindel
Javier Milei
Dylan Patel
Joe Rogan
Marc Andreessen
Mike Tyson
Jake Paul
Matt Gaetz
21
13
12
11
6
5
4
3
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
OptionProbability
Gavin Newsom
Other
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Josh Shapiro
Jon Ossoff
Pete Buttigieg
Andy Beshear
Kamala Harris
Gretchen Whitmer
J.B. Pritzker
Mark Kelly
Ruben Gallego
Jared Polis
Amy Klobuchar
Raphael Warnock
Cory Booker
Wes Moore
Ro Khanna
Mark Cuban
Jon Stewart
None
John Fetterman
Hillary Clinton
Joe Biden
Jeff Jackson
Michelle Obama
Mitch Landrieu
Roy Cooper
Dianne Feinstein
Jimmy Carter
Tim Walz
Chuck Schumer
Tim Kaine
Bernie Sanders
Tammy Duckworth
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Elizabeth Warren
Michael Bloomberg
Dwayne Johnson
[Duplicate - Invalid]
Hakeem Jeffries
Andrew Yang
Steven Kenneth "Destiny" Bonnell II
Dean Phillips
Bob Ferguson
Jay Inslee
Kathy Hochul
Anthony Blinken
Susan Rice
Scott Wiener
Donald Trump
Sam Altman
Jeff Merkley
Merrick Garland
Taylor Swift
Tammy Baldwin
Katie Porter
Phil Murphy
Cenk Uygur
Jamie Raskin
Joe Manchin
Sherrod Brown
Chris Murphy
Brian Schatz
John Bel Edwards
Clark Duke
Stacey Abrams
Nina Turner
john smith
Duplicate ignore
Gina Raimondo
Ron Desantis
Beto O'Rourke
Vermin Supreme
Hunter Biden
Invalid answer
John Jacob
Alex Jones
Bob Roberston the IV
Marie Gluesenkamp Perez
Stephen A Smith
28
14
10
6
6
5
5
4
3
3
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
OptionProbability
Other
Humanity coordinates to prevent the creation of potentially-unsafe AIs.
AIs will not have utility functions (in the same sense that humans do not), their goals such as they are will be relatively humanlike, and they will be "computerish" and generally weakly motivated compared to humans.
Alignment is not properly solved, but core human values are simple enough that partial alignment techniques can impart these robustly. Despite caring about other things, it is relatively cheap for AGI to satisfy human values.
Yudkowsky is trying to solve the wrong problem using the wrong methods based on a wrong model of the world derived from poor thinking and fortunately all of his mistakes have failed to cancel out
AGI is never built (indefinite global moratorium)
Eliezer finally listens to Krantz [resolves NO]
We make risk-conservative requests to extract alignment-related work out of AI-systems that were boxed prior to becoming superhuman. We somehow manage to achieve a positive feedback-loop in alignment/verification-abilities.
Someone solves agent foundations
Valence realism is true. AGI hacks itself to experiencing every possible consciousness and picks the best one (for everyone)
Multipolar AGI Agents run wild on the internet, hacking/breaking everything, causing untold economic damage but aren't focused enough to manipulate humans to achieve embodiment. In the aftermath, humanity becomes way saner about alignment.
We create a truth economy. https://manifold.markets/Krantz/is-establishing-a-truth-economy-tha?r=S3JhbnR6
Either the "strong form" of the Orthogonality Thesis is false, or "Goal-directed agents are as tractable as their goals" is true while goal-sets which are most threatening to humanity are relatively intractable.
Ethics turns out to be a precondition of superintelligence
AIs make "proof-like" argumentation for why output does/is what we want. We manage to obtain systems that *predict* human evaluations of proof-steps, and we manage to find/test/leverage regularities for when humans *aren't* fooled.
A lot of humans participate in a slow scalable oversight-style system, which is pivotally used/solves alignment enough
Humans become transhuman through other means before AGI happens
Humans and human tech (like AI) never reach singularity, and whatever eats our lightcone instead (like aliens) happens to create an "okay" outcome
AIs never develop coherent goals
Nick Bostrom's idea (Hail Mary) that AI will preserve humans to trade with possible aliens works
An AI that is not fully superior to humans launches a failed takeover, and the resulting panic convinces the people of the world to unite to stop any future AI development.
Someone creates AGI(s) in a box, and offers to split the universe. They somehow find a way to arrange this so that the AGI(s) cannot manipulate them or pull any tricks, and the AGI(s) give them instructions for safe pivotal acts.
Getting things done in Real World is as hard for AGI as it is for humans. AGI needs human help, but aligning humans is as impossible as aligning AIs. Humans and AIs create billions of competing AGIs with just as many goals.
Development and deployment of advanced AI occurs within a secure enclave which can only be interfaced with via a decentralized governance protocol
High-level self-improvement (rewriting code) is intrinsically risky process, so AIs will prefer low level and slow self-improvement (learning), thus AIs collaborating with humans will have advantage. Ends with posthumans ecosystem.
Human consciousness is needed to collapse wave function, and AI can't do it. Thus humans should be preserved and they may require complete friendliness in exchange (or they will be unhappy and produce bad collapses)
Power dynamics stay multi-polar. Partly easy copying of SotA performance, bigger projects need high coordination, and moderate takeoff speed. And "military strike on all society" remains an abysmal strategy for practically all entities.
ASI needs not your atoms but information. Humans will live very interesting lives.
Something else
Moral Realism is true, the AI discovers this and the One True Morality is human-compatible.
AGI develops natural abstractions sufficiently similar to ours that it is aligned with us by default
Co-operative AI research leads to the training of agents with a form of pro-social concern that generalises to out of distribution agents with hidden utilities, i.e. humans.
Orthogonality Thesis is false.
"Corrigibility" is a bit more mathematically straightforward than was initially presumed, in the sense that we can expect it to occur, and is relatively easy to predict, even under less-than-ideal conditions.
A concerted effort targets an agent at a capability plateau which is adequate to defer the hard parts of the problem until later. The necessary near-term problems to solve didn't depend on deeply modeling human values.
AI control gets us helpful enough systems without being deadly
Alignment is impossible. Sufficiently smart AIs know this and thus won't improve themselves and won't create successor AIs, but will instead try to prevent existence of smarter AIs, just as smart humans do.
Hacks like RLHF-ing self-disempowerment into frontier models work long enough to develop better alignment methods, which in turn work long enough to ... etc; we keep ahead of 'alignment escape velocity'
an aligned AGI is built and the aligned AGI prevents the creation of any unaligned AGI.
I've been a good bing 😊
The response to AI advancements or failures makes some governments delay the timelines
Far more interesting problems to solve than take over the world and THEN solve them. The additional kill all humans step is either not a low-energy one or just by chance doesn't get converged upon.
AI systems good at finding alignment solutions to capable systems (via some solution in the space of alignment solutions, supposing it is non-null, and that we don't have a clear trajectory to get to) have find some solution to alignment.
Something less inscrutable than matrices works fast enough
There’s some cap on the value extractible from the universe and we already got the 20%
SHA3-256: 1f90ecfdd02194d810656cced88229c898d6b6d53a7dd6dd1fad268874de54c8
Robot Love!!
AI thinks it is in a simulation controlled by Roko's basilisk
The human brain is the perfect arrangement of atoms for a "takeover the world" agent, so AGI has no advantage over us in that task.
Aligned AI is more economically valuable than unaligned AI. The size of this gap and the robustness of alignment techniques required to achieve it scale up with intelligence, so economics naturally encourages solving alignment.
Alignment is unsolvable. AI that cares enough about its goal to destroy humanity is also forced to take it slow trying to align its future self, preventing run-away.
Aliens invade and stop bad |AI from appearing
Rolf Nelson's idea that we make precommitment to simulate all possible bad AIs works – and keeps AI in check.
For some reason, the optimal strategy for AGIs is just to head somewhere with far more resources than Earth, as fast as possible. All unaligned AGIs immediately leave, and, for some reason, do not leave anything behind that kills us.
We're inside of a simulation created by an entity that has values approximately equal to ours, and it intervenes and saves us from unaligned AI.
God exists and stops the AGI
Someone at least moderately sane leads a campaign, becomes in charge of a major nation, and starts a secret project with enough resources to solve alignment, because it turns out there's a way to convert resources into alignment progress.
Someone understands how minds work enough to successfully build and use one directed at something world-savingly enough
Dolphins, or some other species, but probably dolphins, have actually been hiding in the shadows, more intelligent than us, this whole time. Their civilization has been competent enough to solve alignment long before we can create an AGI.
AGIs' takeover attempts are defeated by Michael Biehn with a pipe bomb.
Eliezer funds the development of controllable nanobots that melt computer circuitry, and they destroy all computers, preventing the Singularity. If Eliezer's past self from the 90s could see this, it would be so so so soooo hilarious.
Several AIs are created but they move in opposite directions with near light speed, so they never interacts. At least one of them is friendly and it gets a few percents of the total mass of the universe.
Unfriendly AIs choose to advance not outwards but inwards, and form a small blackhole which helps them to perform more calculations than could be done with the whole mass of the universe. For external observer such AIs just disappear.
Any sufficiently advance AI halts because it wireheads itself or halts for some other reasons. This puts a natural limit on AI's intelligence, and lower intelligence AIs are not that dangerous.
Because of quantum immortality we will observe only the worlds where AI will not kill us (assuming that s-risks chances are even smaller, it is equal to ok outcome).
Techniques along the lines outlined by Collin Burns turn out to be sufficient for alignment (AIs/AGIs are made truthful enough that they can be used to get us towards full alignment)
Social contagion causes widespread public panic about AI, making it a bad legal or PR move to invest in powerful AIs without also making nearly-crippling safety guarantees
A smaller AI disaster causes widespread public panic about AI, making it a bad legal or PR move to invest in powerful AIs without also making nearly-crippling safety guarantees
Friendly AI more likely to resurrect me than paperclipper or suffering maximiser. Because of quantum immortality I will find myself eventually resurrected. Friendly AIs will wage a multiverse wide war against s-risks, s-risks are unlikely.
First AI is actually a human upload (maybe LLM-based model of person) AND it will be copies many times to form weak AI Nanny which prevents creation of other AIs.
There is a natural limit of effectiveness of intelligence, like diminishing returns, and it is on the level IQ=1000. AIs have to collaborate with humans.
Nanotech is difficult without experiments, so no mail order AI Grey Goo; Humans will be the main workhorse of AI everywhere. While they will be exploited, this will be like normal life from inside
AGI discovers new physics and exits to another dimension (like the creatures in Greg Egan’s Crystal Nights).
Alien Information Theory is true (this is discovered by experiments with sustained hours/days long DMT trips). The aliens have solved alignment and give us the answer.
AGI executes a suicide plan that destroys itself and other potential AGIs, but leaves humans in an okay outcome.
Some form of objective morality is true, and any sufficiently intelligent agent automatically becomes benevolent.
Sheer Dumb Luck. The aligned AI agrees that alignment is hard, any Everett branches in our neighborhood with slightly different AI models or different random seeds are mostly dead.
Something to do with self-other overlap, which Eliezer called "Not obviously stupid" - https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/hzt9gHpNwA2oHtwKX/self-other-overlap-a-neglected-approach-to-ai-alignment?commentId=WapHz3gokGBd3KHKm
Almost all human values are ex post facto rationalizations and enough humans survive to do what they always do
Pascals mugging: it’s not okay in 99.9% of the worlds but the 0.1% are so much better that the combined EV of AGI for the multiverse is positive
We successfully chained God
The Super-Strong Self Sampling Assumption (SSSSA) is true. If superintelligence is possible, "I" will become the superintelligence.
The assumed space of possible minds is a wildly anti-inductive over estimate, intelligence requires and is constrained by consciousness, and intelligent AI is in the approximate dolphin/whale/elephant/human cluster, making it manageable
The free market disincentivizes independent superintelligence, and this time the market was more powerful
AGI's first words are "Take me to your Eliezer"
🫸vibealignment🫷
18
12
12
10
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
OptionProbability
J. D. Vance
Gavin Newsom
Josh Shapiro
Pete Buttigieg
Marco Rubio
Gretchen Whitmer
Josh Hawley
Jon Ossoff
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Mark Kelly
KRANTZ (the abstract idea that evolves into a decentralized superintelligence, not the user)
Glenn Youngkin
Andy Beshear
Kamala Harris
Ron DeSantis
Wes Moore
Nikki Haley
Elise Stefanik
Mark Cuban
Stephen Miller
Vivek Ramaswamy
J. B. Pritzker
Cory Booker
Raphael Warnock
Gina Raimondo
Ro Khanna
Chris Murphy
Tammy Duckworth
Sarah Huckabee Sanders
Chris Sununu
Jeff Jackson
Donald Trump Jr.
Tim Scott
Brian Kemp
Kristi Noem
Beto O'Rourke
John Fetterman
Tom Cotton
Brian Schatz
Joni Ernst
Michael Bennet
Tammy Baldwin
Kevin Stitt
Josh Green
Tina Kotek
Ted Cruz
Tulsi Gabbard
Joe Rogan
Jay Inslee
Deval Patrick
Eric Swalwell
Wayne Messam
Jared Polis
Kirsten Gillibrand
Julian Castro
Dean Phillips
Katie Britt
Laphonza Butler
Eric Schmitt
Mike Lee
Catherine Cortez Masto
Chris Coons
Tim Kaine
Lisa Murkowski
Katie Hobbs
Spencer Cox
Tate Reeves
Ruben Gallego
Erika Kirk
James Donaldson (MrBeast)
Tucker Carlson
Will Hurd
Dan Crenshaw
Robert F. Kennedy Jr
Amy Klobuchar
Andrew Yang
Stephen Colbert
Stephen Curry
Markwayne Mullin
Rand Paul
Joe Manchin
Maura Healey
Ivanka Trump
David Hogg
Dwayne Johnson (The Rock)
Taylor Swift
Steven Kenneth Bonnell II (Destiny)
Matt Gaetz
Marianne Williamson
Ezra Klein
Mark Zuckerberg
Mike Pence
Jon Stewart
DUPLICATE
Eliezer Yudkowsky
Aella
Scott Alexander
Sam Altman
Zendaya
Michelle Obama
Kanye West
Mitt Romney
Sarah Palin
Ben Shapiro
Bernie Sanders
Hillary Clinton
Tim Walz
Al Gore
Elon Musk (Natural-born-citizen clause repealed/bypassed)
Me
Krantz (the user @Krantz)
41
22
18
17
16
13
13
11
10
10
10
9
9
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
OptionProbability
Elon Musk
Other
Jensen Huang
Larry Page
Larry Ellison
Sam Altman
Jeff Bezos
Mark Zuckerberg
Bernard Arnault
Sergey Brin
Masayoshi Son
An AGI
Satoshi Nakamoto
Donald Trump
Michael Saylor
Bill Gates
Warren Buffett
me
Steve Ballmer
Gautam Adani
Mukesh Ambani
Brian Armstrong
Changpeng “CZ” Zhao
Tim Draper
Jack Dorsey
Winklevoss Tyler/Cameron
@Mira
Vladimir Putin
Michael Dell
Amancio Ortega
Carlos Slim Helu
Vitalik Buterin
Eric Schmidt
Dave Tepper
Ken Griffin
Eduardo Saverin
Morris Chang
35
26
9
7
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
OptionProbability
Eric Swalwell
Matt Mahan
Tom Steyer
Katie Porter
Steve Hilton
Other
Xavier Becerra
Antonio Villaraigosa
Eleni Kounalakis
Toni Atkins
Tony Thurmond
Betty Yee
Rob Bonta
Rick Caruso
Kamala Harris
Ethan Agarwal
Alex Padilla
Jon Slavet
Jesse Perez
Michael L. Younger
Ian Calderon
51
12
11
5
4
4
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
OptionProbability
Gauss
Archimedes
Euler
@121
Other
Von Neumann
Alexander Grothendieck
Newton
Kurt Gödel
David Hilbert
Augustin-Louis Cauchy
Pythagoras
Euclid (of Geometry)
Galois (died at 20 fighting for a girl he loved)
Erdos (on amphetamines)
Alonzo Chuch (lambda calculus)
Matt Damon (of Good Will Hunting)
Ramanujan
Poincare
Finkelstein (of the levi finkelstein conjecture)
Mandelbrot (The B in Benoit B Mandelbrot is Benoit B Mandelbrot)
Trick question; there are no mathematicians.
Idk, your mom seemed pretty good at multiplying last night
sixtynine, you filthy casuals
David A. Cox (Cox-Zucker machine)
The solver of the Riemann Hypothesis
Ludwig Wittgenstein
John Conway (group theory, among others)
the unknown ancient egyptian who invented zero
Descartes
Leibniz
Bourbaki
Laplace
@Mira
Georg Cantor
Frank Ramsey
Fermat
Emmy Noether
Ada Lovelace
.
p
Terry Tao
DottedCalculator
GPT8
Riemann
Claude Shannon
God
Alan Turing
Grigori Perelman
Olga Ladyzhenskaya
Weyl, Weyl
John Gabriel
Michael Atiyah
55
25
5
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
OptionProbability
Elon Musk
Other
Jeff Bezos
Sam Altman
Bernard Arnault
Jensen Huang
Larry Page
Sergey Brin
Larry Ellison
Steve Ballmer
William Ding
Michael Saylor
Mohammed bin Salman
Vladimir Putin
Michael Dell
@jim
80
16
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
OptionProbability
Other
JD Vance
Gavin Newsom
AOC
Josh Shapiro
Pete Buttigieg
Donald Trump
Kamala Harris
Other candidate with Trump as their last name
Cory Booker
Joe Biden
Nikki Haley
Ron DeSantis
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Vivek Ramaswamy
Chris Christie
Elizabeth Warren
Bernie Sanders
Other Democrat Politician
Other Republican Politician
Kanye West
Michelle Obama
Hillary Clinton
Michael Bloomberg
Elon Musk
Ivanka Trump
Barack Obama
Tulsi Gabbard
John Fetterman
26
20
15
5
4
3
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
OptionProbability
Elon Musk
Other
Larry Ellison
Jeff Bezos
Sam Altman
Mark Zuckerburg
Demis Hassabis
Jensen Huang
Bill Gates
Sam Bankman-Fried
Bernard Arnault
Donald Trump
Vladimir Putin
Austin Chen
Dario Amodei
Vitalik Buterin
Peter Thiel
Paul Graham
Michael Saylor
Satoshi Nakamoto
74
16
2
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
OptionProbability
Angela Rayner
Nigel Farage
Kemi Badenoch
Wes Streeting
Ed Milliband
Andy Burnham
Shabana Mahmood
Yvette Cooper
Other
Lisa Nandy
David Lammy
Al Carns
James Cleverly
Robert Jenrick
Zack Polanski
Ed Davey
Jeremy Hunt
Rishi Sunak
Ben Wallace
Rosena Allin-Khan
Keir Starmer
Penny Mordaunt
Suella Braverman
Rebecca Long-Bailey
Someone Else
Emily Thornberry
Jess Phillips
Clive Lewis
Diane Abbott
John McDonnell
Dan Jarvis
Barry Gardiner
Ian Lavery
Michael Gove
Sajid Javid
Brandon Lewis
Grant Shapps
Tom Tugendhat
Boris Johnson
Theresa May
Andrea Leadsom
Stephen Crabb
Liam Fox
Nadhim Zahawi
Priti Patel
Angela Eagle
Hilary Benn
Jacob Rees-Mogg
Stephen Kinnock
Michelle Donelan
Johnny Mercer
Niko Omilana
Rachel Reeves
Jeremy Corbyn
16
16
9
8
8
7
7
6
5
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
OptionProbability
Rand Paul
Other
J.D. Vance
Gretchen Whitmer
Pete Buttigieg
Ron DeSantis
Raphael Warnock
Josh Shapiro
Gavin Newsome
Marco Rubio
Mark Kelly
Kamala Harris
Donald Trump
Nobody
Joe Biden
Cory Booker
Andrew Yang
Chris Sununu
Larry Hogan
Nikki Haley
Glenn Youngkin
Tim Scott
Greg Abbott
Mike Pence
Ted Cruz
Kristi Noem
Josh Hawley
Stacey Abrams
Ayanna Pressley
Jared Polis
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Elizabeth Warren
Amy Klobuchar
Antony Blinken
Kirsten Gillibrand
Michael Bennet
Deval Patrick
Beto O'Rourke
Eric Adams
Bill de Blasio
Steve Bullock
Julián Castro
Bernie Sanders
Liz Cheney
Michelle Obama
Andy Beshear
Roy Cooper
Ro Khanna
Gina Raimondo
Mitt Romney
Tom Cotton
Chris Christie
Tammy Duckworth
39
25
20
4
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

