Trump's established pattern of direct personal attacks in public statements, especially on Truth Social and during press interactions, drives near-certain trader consensus on these daily markets. As of mid-September 2026, recent examples include his September 18 post labeling administration leakers “dirty dogs” amid Iran war reporting, repeated rebukes of female journalists as “the worst” or “fake news” during September events, and earlier broadsides against media outlets as “treasonous scum” over munitions coverage. Ongoing conflict developments, midterm convention appearances, and routine social media activity sustain high implied probabilities, with resolution hinging on verifiable public statements meeting the market's criteria for insults or derogatory nicknames. Scheduled press access and any escalation in administration disputes could influence specific dates.
基於Polymarket數據的AI實驗性摘要。這不是交易建議，也不影響該市場的結算方式。 · 更新於$45,298 交易量
2026-09-03
9月3日
74%
9月17日
100%
9月18日
93%
9月19日
90%
9月20日
90%
9月21日
92%
9月22日
93%
9月23日
88%
9月24日
84%
9月25日
87%
9月26日
87%
9月27日
86%
9月28日
92%
9月29日
89%
9月30日
94%
$45,298 交易量
9月3日
$2,822 交易量
74%
9月17日
$1,715 交易量
100%
9月18日
$137 交易量
93%
9月19日
$319 交易量
90%
9月20日
$386 交易量
90%
9月21日
$280 交易量
92%
9月22日
$265 交易量
93%
9月23日
$786 交易量
88%
9月24日
$1,365 交易量
84%
9月25日
$1,466 交易量
87%
9月26日
$599 交易量
87%
9月27日
$2,898 交易量
86%
9月28日
$251 交易量
92%
9月29日
$390 交易量
89%
9月30日
$454 交易量
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 established pattern of direct personal attacks in public statements, especially on Truth Social and during press interactions, drives near-certain trader consensus on these daily markets. As of mid-September 2026, recent examples include his September 18 post labeling administration leakers “dirty dogs” amid Iran war reporting, repeated rebukes of female journalists as “the worst” or “fake news” during September events, and earlier broadsides against media outlets as “treasonous scum” over munitions coverage. Ongoing conflict developments, midterm convention appearances, and routine social media activity sustain high implied probabilities, with resolution hinging on verifiable public statements meeting the market's criteria for insults or derogatory nicknames. Scheduled press access and any escalation in administration disputes could influence specific dates.
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.
市場開放時間： Sep 2, 2026, 5:16 PM ET
交易量
$45,298結束日期
2026-10-01市場開放時間
Sep 2, 2026, 5:16 PM ETThis 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 established pattern of direct personal attacks in public statements, especially on Truth Social and during press interactions, drives near-certain trader consensus on these daily markets. As of mid-September 2026, recent examples include his September 18 post labeling administration leakers “dirty dogs” amid Iran war reporting, repeated rebukes of female journalists as “the worst” or “fake news” during September events, and earlier broadsides against media outlets as “treasonous scum” over munitions coverage. Ongoing conflict developments, midterm convention appearances, and routine social media activity sustain high implied probabilities, with resolution hinging on verifiable public statements meeting the market's criteria for insults or derogatory nicknames. Scheduled press access and any escalation in administration disputes could influence specific dates.
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.
交易量
$45,298結束日期
2026-10-01市場開放時間
Sep 2, 2026, 5:16 PM ETTrump's established pattern of direct personal attacks in public statements, especially on Truth Social and during press interactions, drives near-certain trader consensus on these daily markets. As of mid-September 2026, recent examples include his September 18 post labeling administration leakers “dirty dogs” amid Iran war reporting, repeated rebukes of female journalists as “the worst” or “fake news” during September events, and earlier broadsides against media outlets as “treasonous scum” over munitions coverage. Ongoing conflict developments, midterm convention appearances, and routine social media activity sustain high implied probabilities, with resolution hinging on verifiable public statements meeting the market's criteria for insults or derogatory nicknames. Scheduled press access and any escalation in administration disputes could influence specific dates.
基於Polymarket數據的AI實驗性摘要。這不是交易建議，也不影響該市場的結算方式。 · 更新於
警惕外部連結哦。
警惕外部連結哦。
Frequently Asked Questions