Trump's established pattern of direct personal criticism through Truth Social posts, press interactions, and public remarks continues to shape trader views on these date-specific markets. As president in 2026, he has repeatedly targeted media figures and political opponents amid foreign policy matters, including references to journalists during NATO summits and the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. Recent examples include exchanges with reporters from CNN and others over questions on policy and coverage. This record drives the near-certain implied probabilities on many daily contracts, with resolution depending on verifiable public language meeting the criteria for insults rather than policy disagreements alone. Scheduled events such as summits or media appearances within the resolution window can influence the likelihood of qualifying statements.
Experimental AI-generated summary referencing Polymarket data. This is not trading advice and plays no role in how this market resolves. · Updated$26,192 Vol.
September 3
69%
September 6
61%
September 7
86%
September 8
90%
September 9
94%
September 10
93%
September 11
92%
September 12
57%
September 13
54%
September 14
88%
September 15
89%
September 16
87%
September 17
91%
September 18
90%
September 19
57%
September 20
53%
September 21
89%
September 22
87%
September 23
87%
September 24
72%
September 25
86%
September 26
55%
September 27
70%
September 28
90%
September 29
83%
September 30
84%
$26,192 Vol.
September 3
69%
September 6
61%
September 7
86%
September 8
90%
September 9
94%
September 10
93%
September 11
92%
September 12
57%
September 13
54%
September 14
88%
September 15
89%
September 16
87%
September 17
91%
September 18
90%
September 19
57%
September 20
53%
September 21
89%
September 22
87%
September 23
87%
September 24
72%
September 25
86%
September 26
55%
September 27
70%
September 28
90%
September 29
83%
September 30
84%
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
Resolver
0x65070BE91...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.
Resolver
0x65070BE91...Trump's established pattern of direct personal criticism through Truth Social posts, press interactions, and public remarks continues to shape trader views on these date-specific markets. As president in 2026, he has repeatedly targeted media figures and political opponents amid foreign policy matters, including references to journalists during NATO summits and the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. Recent examples include exchanges with reporters from CNN and others over questions on policy and coverage. This record drives the near-certain implied probabilities on many daily contracts, with resolution depending on verifiable public language meeting the criteria for insults rather than policy disagreements alone. Scheduled events such as summits or media appearances within the resolution window can influence the likelihood of qualifying statements.
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