Trump’s established pattern of direct public criticism through Truth Social posts, press interactions, and speeches continues to drive near-certain trader consensus on these daily markets. As president in September 2026, he has repeatedly targeted leakers, journalists, and political opponents, including recent threats against administration insiders over Iran war details and sharp exchanges with female reporters questioning midterm incentives or policy costs. Ongoing pressures from the Iran conflict, midterm election efforts, and frequent media access sustain the frequency of such statements, with historical volume showing resolutions to Yes on the vast majority of dates. Scheduled events like congressional votes or diplomatic activity could influence visibility but rarely alter the baseline likelihood.
基于Polymarket数据的AI实验性摘要。这不是交易建议,也不影响该市场的结算方式。 · 更新于$45,298 交易量
9月3日
76%
9月17日
100%
9月18日
93%
9月19日
91%
9月20日
91%
9月21日
92%
9月22日
92%
9月23日
88%
9月24日
85%
9月25日
88%
9月26日
87%
9月27日
86%
9月28日
91%
9月29日
89%
9月30日
94%
$45,298 交易量
9月3日
76%
9月17日
100%
9月18日
93%
9月19日
91%
9月20日
91%
9月21日
92%
9月22日
92%
9月23日
88%
9月24日
85%
9月25日
88%
9月26日
87%
9月27日
86%
9月28日
91%
9月29日
89%
9月30日
94%
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.
市场开放时间: Sep 2, 2026, 5:16 PM ET
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 public criticism through Truth Social posts, press interactions, and speeches continues to drive near-certain trader consensus on these daily markets. As president in September 2026, he has repeatedly targeted leakers, journalists, and political opponents, including recent threats against administration insiders over Iran war details and sharp exchanges with female reporters questioning midterm incentives or policy costs. Ongoing pressures from the Iran conflict, midterm election efforts, and frequent media access sustain the frequency of such statements, with historical volume showing resolutions to Yes on the vast majority of dates. Scheduled events like congressional votes or diplomatic activity could influence visibility but rarely alter the baseline likelihood.
基于Polymarket数据的AI实验性摘要。这不是交易建议,也不影响该市场的结算方式。 · 更新于



警惕外部链接哦。
警惕外部链接哦。
常见问题