Trump's long record of direct personal criticism through Truth Social posts, interviews, and speeches continues to shape trader views on daily insult markets. As president in 2026, he has repeatedly targeted journalists and political figures, including an August 29 attack on New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman that used derogatory nicknames and accusations of fabrication. Earlier examples include a July White House Correspondents’ Dinner address featuring multiple ad hominem remarks against reporters and opponents, plus prior exchanges with figures such as Kaitlan Collins. These patterns, combined with ongoing public statements on policy disputes, underpin strong market consensus that such language appears on most dates. Scheduled events like press interactions or legislative debates could influence frequency, though resolution hinges on verifiable public statements meeting the market criteria.
Experimental AI-generated summary referencing Polymarket data. This is not trading advice and plays no role in how this market resolves. · UpdatedNEW
$15,587 Vol.
Sep 3, 2026
September 3
92%
September 4
95%
September 5
88%
September 6
49%
September 7
92%
September 8
89%
September 9
94%
September 10
88%
September 11
94%
September 12
88%
September 13
84%
September 14
94%
September 15
88%
September 16
90%
September 17
92%
September 18
54%
September 19
85%
September 20
85%
September 21
91%
September 22
86%
September 23
91%
September 24
91%
September 25
87%
September 26
88%
September 27
82%
September 28
91%
September 29
84%
September 30
94%
$15,587 Vol.
September 3
$708 Vol.
92%
September 4
$1,897 Vol.
95%
September 5
$1,332 Vol.
88%
September 6
$406 Vol.
49%
September 7
$765 Vol.
92%
September 8
$123 Vol.
89%
September 9
$805 Vol.
94%
September 10
$654 Vol.
88%
September 11
$1,906 Vol.
94%
September 12
$174 Vol.
88%
September 13
$378 Vol.
84%
September 14
$242 Vol.
94%
September 15
$172 Vol.
88%
September 16
$1,201 Vol.
90%
September 17
$805 Vol.
92%
September 18
$0 Vol.
54%
September 19
$216 Vol.
85%
September 20
$252 Vol.
85%
September 21
$115 Vol.
91%
September 22
$126 Vol.
86%
September 23
$695 Vol.
91%
September 24
$565 Vol.
91%
September 25
$566 Vol.
87%
September 26
$434 Vol.
88%
September 27
$733 Vol.
82%
September 28
$31 Vol.
91%
September 29
$196 Vol.
84%
September 30
$91 Vol.
94%
This market will resolve to "Yes" if Donald Trump makes a public statement in which he insults any non-fictional individual on the specified date (ET). Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No".
A qualifying public statement is any written, verbal, or recorded statement which is either made in a public setting, published by the speaker, or on the record to media, and the direct language of which is made publicly available on the specified date (ET). Pre-recorded public statements will count for the date (ET) that they are made publicly available. Statements made in private that are subsequently leaked will not qualify, even if credibly reported. Narrations and paraphrasings do not qualify.
Images and videos posted on verified social media accounts will only qualify if they contain insulting language clearly directed at the individual, whether within the content itself or in an accompanying caption. Language within the content of a video will only qualify if Donald Trump is clearly portrayed as saying it. Insulting language within the content of a video said by anyone other than Donald Trump or a portrayal thereof will not qualify.
A quote post will qualify if added language independently qualifies as an insult, or endorses insulting language directed at the individual within the quoted post; a repost of another account's post will not qualify.
A public statement qualifies as an insult if it mocks, degrades, or disparages the individual either personally or professionally. This includes calling the individual a clearly insulting trait (e.g., weak, stupid, disloyal, a failure), using an insulting nickname (e.g., Crooked Hillary), using other clearly derogatory language, or using the negative form of a positive trait in a clearly derogatory manner (e.g., “He isn’t smart”, “He has no judgment”). Disparaging the individual in their professional capacity will qualify (e.g., "He is a disaster candidate," "He is terrible at his job"); however, negative comments directed at the individual's specific actions, policies, or decisions will not qualify (e.g., "He has bad policies," "He is wrong about healthcare").
A statement made in direct reference to the individual will qualify even if they are not named, so long as it is reasonably clear from context that they are the subject.
The resolution sources will be public statements made by Donald Trump and a consensus of credible reporting.Trump's long record of direct personal criticism through Truth Social posts, interviews, and speeches continues to shape trader views on daily insult markets. As president in 2026, he has repeatedly targeted journalists and political figures, including an August 29 attack on New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman that used derogatory nicknames and accusations of fabrication. Earlier examples include a July White House Correspondents’ Dinner address featuring multiple ad hominem remarks against reporters and opponents, plus prior exchanges with figures such as Kaitlan Collins. These patterns, combined with ongoing public statements on policy disputes, underpin strong market consensus that such language appears on most dates. Scheduled events like press interactions or legislative debates could influence frequency, though resolution hinges on verifiable public statements meeting the market criteria.
This market will resolve to "Yes" if Donald Trump makes a public statement in which he insults any non-fictional individual on the specified date (ET). Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No".
A qualifying public statement is any written, verbal, or recorded statement which is either made in a public setting, published by the speaker, or on the record to media, and the direct language of which is made publicly available on the specified date (ET). Pre-recorded public statements will count for the date (ET) that they are made publicly available. Statements made in private that are subsequently leaked will not qualify, even if credibly reported. Narrations and paraphrasings do not qualify.
Images and videos posted on verified social media accounts will only qualify if they contain insulting language clearly directed at the individual, whether within the content itself or in an accompanying caption. Language within the content of a video will only qualify if Donald Trump is clearly portrayed as saying it. Insulting language within the content of a video said by anyone other than Donald Trump or a portrayal thereof will not qualify.
A quote post will qualify if added language independently qualifies as an insult, or endorses insulting language directed at the individual within the quoted post; a repost of another account's post will not qualify.
A public statement qualifies as an insult if it mocks, degrades, or disparages the individual either personally or professionally. This includes calling the individual a clearly insulting trait (e.g., weak, stupid, disloyal, a failure), using an insulting nickname (e.g., Crooked Hillary), using other clearly derogatory language, or using the negative form of a positive trait in a clearly derogatory manner (e.g., “He isn’t smart”, “He has no judgment”). Disparaging the individual in their professional capacity will qualify (e.g., "He is a disaster candidate," "He is terrible at his job"); however, negative comments directed at the individual's specific actions, policies, or decisions will not qualify (e.g., "He has bad policies," "He is wrong about healthcare").
A statement made in direct reference to the individual will qualify even if they are not named, so long as it is reasonably clear from context that they are the subject.
The resolution sources will be public statements made by Donald Trump and a consensus of credible reporting.
A qualifying public statement is any written, verbal, or recorded statement which is either made in a public setting, published by the speaker, or on the record to media, and the direct language of which is made publicly available on the specified date (ET). Pre-recorded public statements will count for the date (ET) that they are made publicly available. Statements made in private that are subsequently leaked will not qualify, even if credibly reported. Narrations and paraphrasings do not qualify.
Images and videos posted on verified social media accounts will only qualify if they contain insulting language clearly directed at the individual, whether within the content itself or in an accompanying caption. Language within the content of a video will only qualify if Donald Trump is clearly portrayed as saying it. Insulting language within the content of a video said by anyone other than Donald Trump or a portrayal thereof will not qualify.
A quote post will qualify if added language independently qualifies as an insult, or endorses insulting language directed at the individual within the quoted post; a repost of another account's post will not qualify.
A public statement qualifies as an insult if it mocks, degrades, or disparages the individual either personally or professionally. This includes calling the individual a clearly insulting trait (e.g., weak, stupid, disloyal, a failure), using an insulting nickname (e.g., Crooked Hillary), using other clearly derogatory language, or using the negative form of a positive trait in a clearly derogatory manner (e.g., “He isn’t smart”, “He has no judgment”). Disparaging the individual in their professional capacity will qualify (e.g., "He is a disaster candidate," "He is terrible at his job"); however, negative comments directed at the individual's specific actions, policies, or decisions will not qualify (e.g., "He has bad policies," "He is wrong about healthcare").
A statement made in direct reference to the individual will qualify even if they are not named, so long as it is reasonably clear from context that they are the subject.
The resolution sources will be public statements made by Donald Trump and a consensus of credible reporting.
Market Opened: Sep 2, 2026, 5:16 PM ET
Volume
$15,587End Date
Oct 1, 2026Market Opened
Sep 2, 2026, 5:16 PM ETResolver
0x65070BE91...This market will resolve to "Yes" if Donald Trump makes a public statement in which he insults any non-fictional individual on the specified date (ET). Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No".
A qualifying public statement is any written, verbal, or recorded statement which is either made in a public setting, published by the speaker, or on the record to media, and the direct language of which is made publicly available on the specified date (ET). Pre-recorded public statements will count for the date (ET) that they are made publicly available. Statements made in private that are subsequently leaked will not qualify, even if credibly reported. Narrations and paraphrasings do not qualify.
Images and videos posted on verified social media accounts will only qualify if they contain insulting language clearly directed at the individual, whether within the content itself or in an accompanying caption. Language within the content of a video will only qualify if Donald Trump is clearly portrayed as saying it. Insulting language within the content of a video said by anyone other than Donald Trump or a portrayal thereof will not qualify.
A quote post will qualify if added language independently qualifies as an insult, or endorses insulting language directed at the individual within the quoted post; a repost of another account's post will not qualify.
A public statement qualifies as an insult if it mocks, degrades, or disparages the individual either personally or professionally. This includes calling the individual a clearly insulting trait (e.g., weak, stupid, disloyal, a failure), using an insulting nickname (e.g., Crooked Hillary), using other clearly derogatory language, or using the negative form of a positive trait in a clearly derogatory manner (e.g., “He isn’t smart”, “He has no judgment”). Disparaging the individual in their professional capacity will qualify (e.g., "He is a disaster candidate," "He is terrible at his job"); however, negative comments directed at the individual's specific actions, policies, or decisions will not qualify (e.g., "He has bad policies," "He is wrong about healthcare").
A statement made in direct reference to the individual will qualify even if they are not named, so long as it is reasonably clear from context that they are the subject.
The resolution sources will be public statements made by Donald Trump and a consensus of credible reporting.Trump's long record of direct personal criticism through Truth Social posts, interviews, and speeches continues to shape trader views on daily insult markets. As president in 2026, he has repeatedly targeted journalists and political figures, including an August 29 attack on New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman that used derogatory nicknames and accusations of fabrication. Earlier examples include a July White House Correspondents’ Dinner address featuring multiple ad hominem remarks against reporters and opponents, plus prior exchanges with figures such as Kaitlan Collins. These patterns, combined with ongoing public statements on policy disputes, underpin strong market consensus that such language appears on most dates. Scheduled events like press interactions or legislative debates could influence frequency, though resolution hinges on verifiable public statements meeting the market criteria.
This market will resolve to "Yes" if Donald Trump makes a public statement in which he insults any non-fictional individual on the specified date (ET). Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No".
A qualifying public statement is any written, verbal, or recorded statement which is either made in a public setting, published by the speaker, or on the record to media, and the direct language of which is made publicly available on the specified date (ET). Pre-recorded public statements will count for the date (ET) that they are made publicly available. Statements made in private that are subsequently leaked will not qualify, even if credibly reported. Narrations and paraphrasings do not qualify.
Images and videos posted on verified social media accounts will only qualify if they contain insulting language clearly directed at the individual, whether within the content itself or in an accompanying caption. Language within the content of a video will only qualify if Donald Trump is clearly portrayed as saying it. Insulting language within the content of a video said by anyone other than Donald Trump or a portrayal thereof will not qualify.
A quote post will qualify if added language independently qualifies as an insult, or endorses insulting language directed at the individual within the quoted post; a repost of another account's post will not qualify.
A public statement qualifies as an insult if it mocks, degrades, or disparages the individual either personally or professionally. This includes calling the individual a clearly insulting trait (e.g., weak, stupid, disloyal, a failure), using an insulting nickname (e.g., Crooked Hillary), using other clearly derogatory language, or using the negative form of a positive trait in a clearly derogatory manner (e.g., “He isn’t smart”, “He has no judgment”). Disparaging the individual in their professional capacity will qualify (e.g., "He is a disaster candidate," "He is terrible at his job"); however, negative comments directed at the individual's specific actions, policies, or decisions will not qualify (e.g., "He has bad policies," "He is wrong about healthcare").
A statement made in direct reference to the individual will qualify even if they are not named, so long as it is reasonably clear from context that they are the subject.
The resolution sources will be public statements made by Donald Trump and a consensus of credible reporting.
A qualifying public statement is any written, verbal, or recorded statement which is either made in a public setting, published by the speaker, or on the record to media, and the direct language of which is made publicly available on the specified date (ET). Pre-recorded public statements will count for the date (ET) that they are made publicly available. Statements made in private that are subsequently leaked will not qualify, even if credibly reported. Narrations and paraphrasings do not qualify.
Images and videos posted on verified social media accounts will only qualify if they contain insulting language clearly directed at the individual, whether within the content itself or in an accompanying caption. Language within the content of a video will only qualify if Donald Trump is clearly portrayed as saying it. Insulting language within the content of a video said by anyone other than Donald Trump or a portrayal thereof will not qualify.
A quote post will qualify if added language independently qualifies as an insult, or endorses insulting language directed at the individual within the quoted post; a repost of another account's post will not qualify.
A public statement qualifies as an insult if it mocks, degrades, or disparages the individual either personally or professionally. This includes calling the individual a clearly insulting trait (e.g., weak, stupid, disloyal, a failure), using an insulting nickname (e.g., Crooked Hillary), using other clearly derogatory language, or using the negative form of a positive trait in a clearly derogatory manner (e.g., “He isn’t smart”, “He has no judgment”). Disparaging the individual in their professional capacity will qualify (e.g., "He is a disaster candidate," "He is terrible at his job"); however, negative comments directed at the individual's specific actions, policies, or decisions will not qualify (e.g., "He has bad policies," "He is wrong about healthcare").
A statement made in direct reference to the individual will qualify even if they are not named, so long as it is reasonably clear from context that they are the subject.
The resolution sources will be public statements made by Donald Trump and a consensus of credible reporting.
Volume
$15,587End Date
Oct 1, 2026Market Opened
Sep 2, 2026, 5:16 PM ETResolver
0x65070BE91...Trump's long record of direct personal criticism through Truth Social posts, interviews, and speeches continues to shape trader views on daily insult markets. As president in 2026, he has repeatedly targeted journalists and political figures, including an August 29 attack on New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman that used derogatory nicknames and accusations of fabrication. Earlier examples include a July White House Correspondents’ Dinner address featuring multiple ad hominem remarks against reporters and opponents, plus prior exchanges with figures such as Kaitlan Collins. These patterns, combined with ongoing public statements on policy disputes, underpin strong market consensus that such language appears on most dates. Scheduled events like press interactions or legislative debates could influence frequency, though resolution hinges on verifiable public statements meeting the market criteria.
Experimental AI-generated summary referencing Polymarket data. This is not trading advice and plays no role in how this market resolves. · Updated
Beware of external links.
Beware of external links.
Frequently Asked Questions