These two markets present a fascinating contrast in Democratic primary politics. Both Obama and Cheney represent unconventional paths to the 2028 nomination, though their implausibility stems from different sources. Obama, a former president, would overturn historical precedent and likely face resistance from the sitting Democratic leadership. Cheney would need to switch parties entirely and build a Democratic coalition despite a lifetime in Republican politics. The 1% price on both reflects trader consensus that either scenario falls well outside serious possibility under baseline conditions. The identical pricing is instructive. When vastly different scenarios trade at similar odds, it often signals traders are pricing a base rate of "structural instability in the primary itself" that matters more than the specific candidate. The 1% likely represents the maximum probability any trader assigns to an unconventional path existing at all. Tight pricing suggests high conviction in the Democratic Party's preference for nominated candidates from its active political ranks. These outcomes could move in opposite directions despite both implying disruption. An Obama bid would signal Democratic primary weakness—incumbent vulnerability, internal fracture, or external crisis requiring a stabilizing figure. A Cheney path would reflect ideological realignment so profound that party boundaries collapse entirely. These speak to different failure modes; both scenarios achieving meaningful probability simultaneously is unlikely. Obama requires Democratic insiders feeling desperate; Cheney requires realignment large enough that traditional party membership becomes non-predictive. Traders should watch for Democratic primary instability signals: atypical early polling, sitting president signals about re-nomination appetite, or extraordinary events reshaping elite consensus. For Cheney, structural indicators matter most—GOP-Democratic coalition formation on core issues, or explicit calls for cross-party unity candidates. News tying Democratic weakness to specific geopolitical crises would move Obama odds; evidence of broad ideological realignment would shift Cheney. As of now, both remain distant possibilities priced at market credibility's boundary.