#65
Rank
358
Comments
150
Likes Received
358
Likes Given
n/a
6 days ago
waltz is complete and utter filth
n/a
6 days ago
the difference is the Venezuelan market didnt have a natural deadline
Greta-Tunafish
6 days ago
"UMA voted for 'too early', now they would logically have to vote 'no'." While this reasoning often holds true, it's not the case in this situation. At the time of the proposal, it was difficult to discern what was happening on the night of September 30th. Now that the situation has become clearer, it's evidently an invasion. By this, I don't mean the events that occurred after September 30th, but rather that the interpretation of the September 30th events is now unambiguous. In the past, Domer/JustKen argued in the Venezuela market that it was prudent to wait a few days for the situation to become clearer. This approach is reasonable, and by now, the invasion that began on September 30th is undisputed.
n/a
1 week ago
the vote was leaning towards her not endorsing and polymarket clarified at the last second that she did,
rozi
1 week ago
With Nikki, was that after the vote?
n/a
1 week ago
they actually did it after, they did it in the nikki endorsement market like I said
n/a
1 week ago
guess it's over unless polymarket steps in and clarifies
n/a
1 week ago
they did it with the nikki haley endorsement market
MyLossIsYourGain
1 week ago
chad should buy more since there is a possibility of next 56% all voting for P2
n/a
1 week ago
it wouldn't be, they did it with the nikki haley endorse market
ItCantBeTrollBoy
1 week ago
That would be insane at this point.
n/a
1 week ago
well there's a possibility polymarket clarifies fwiw
MyLossIsYourGain
1 week ago
chad should buy more since there is a possibility of next 56% all voting for P2
n/a
1 week ago
guess it's over unless polymarket steps in and clarifies
n/a
1 week ago
at this point in the market no one ever ever bails btw
Phat.
1 week ago
Eventually one of The YES holders will bail and see its not worth to risk that much in to the unknown to win MAYBE 1% . Going to be a long week for the whales
n/a
1 week ago
I thought YES holders were capitulating but it's at 99c now
n/a
1 week ago
can u buy more shares then
n/a
1 week ago
Hezbollah publicly declared the claims from the Israelis false.
n/a
1 week ago
So we are done buying at 3c+?
n/a
1 week ago
they keep buying more tho
RBvKrsr7ZfRK
1 week ago
Whales holding YES would get out but there’s no exit liquidity. That’s their biggest issue. They’re trapped now and have to troll on Discord to try rigging the vote.
n/a
1 week ago
you prob want to delete the cnn source from your post as it states clearly multiple times that Israel forces have indeed entered lebanon
n/a
1 week ago
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ https://edition.cnn.com/2024/10/01/middleeast/israel-ground-incursion-lebanon-explainer-intl-hnk/index.html https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/10/1/israel-says-has-started-targeted-ground-raids-in-lebanon
n/a
1 week ago
vance attracts more people than trump does, esp swing voters
genghisbrain
1 week ago
I agree with you but now I'm nervous because Ipsos uses KnowledgePanel which is apparently a fixed group of people who currently have Kamala +6 vs Trump...
n/a
1 week ago
Ive never seen favorability ratings change ever, especially not on candidates that the public knows very little about
n/a
1 week ago
buy my orders at 96c and I'll give u some. deal?
OhNos
1 week ago
its funny as f to watch the P2 people just say "P2 YES" and provide NO evidence or rationale lol good luck with that one..
n/a
1 week ago
yes, ur cooked
yeezuschrist0
1 week ago
Real shit tho, are we cooked?? Bc the same bs happened for the RFK dropping out market
n/a
1 week ago
maybe you should try reading the titles. one is about entering, one is about invading
TheFinalWord
1 week ago
This market will resolve to "Yes" if Israeli military personnel physically enter Lebanese territory for combat operations"
n/a
1 week ago
I'm sorry, have you not figured out why we have 2 different markets with 2 vastly different prices?
TheFinalWord
1 week ago
This market will resolve to "Yes" if Israeli military personnel physically enter Lebanese territory for combat operations"
n/a
1 week ago
no one bet 100k to win 200
0x0067e40e99580bB4f48f377786e1f595557578D4-1722634879022
1 week ago
Imagine you bet 100k to get 200$. Just imagine. Now imagine you bet 100k and you get nothing. All imagination huh
n/a
1 week ago
why do you think that is?
TheFinalWord
1 week ago
This market will resolve to "Yes" if Israeli military personnel physically enter Lebanese territory for combat operations"
n/a
1 week ago
we have two markets with very different prices
TheFinalWord
1 week ago
This market will resolve to "Yes" if Israeli military personnel physically enter Lebanese territory for combat operations"
n/a
1 week ago
combat operations are not the same as a ground incursion. a ground incursion is an attack, that's why we have two different markets with two vastly different prices
TheFinalWord
1 week ago
https://www.barrons.com/news/un-peacekeepers-say-no-israeli-ground-incursion-in-south-lebanon-right-now-f51952ef
n/a
1 week ago
all that article says is that they claim there is no ground incursion, not that they have not entered. this would be great evidence for the invasion market, you have shares there right?
TheFinalWord
1 week ago
https://www.barrons.com/news/un-peacekeepers-say-no-israeli-ground-incursion-in-south-lebanon-right-now-f51952ef
n/a
1 week ago
ok show proof that UN said that. link
josephaulicino
1 week ago
Burden on proof is on yes here. Probably will still resolve to yes, but it should resolve to no. There is not media consensus and Israel and hezbollah have not confirmed the incursion actually entered Lebanon territory (actually said it did not).
n/a
1 week ago
there is a media consensus
josephaulicino
1 week ago
Burden on proof is on yes here. Probably will still resolve to yes, but it should resolve to no. There is not media consensus and Israel and hezbollah have not confirmed the incursion actually entered Lebanon territory (actually said it did not).
n/a
1 week ago
if uma resolves this as no, polymarket would step in and emergency resolve it to yes and override them
0x2A4cd726120A0d210ebE980328268163A6CB54E7-1720978918858
1 week ago
What happens if UMA resolves to NO? Do us NO holders get $1/share? Also, if it resolves to too early, what happens?
n/a
1 week ago
your chance of winning is .1 percent, maybe less
0x0067e40e99580bB4f48f377786e1f595557578D4-1722634879022
1 week ago
what amazes me still is the number of people betting their life savings on a disputed market just to gain 5%. I've lived through wallstreetbets but this level of risk/reward illiteracy i've never seen.
n/a
1 week ago
nice attempt to cover up your bad math
Phat.
1 week ago
not even 5% like whats the point of buying 10k to win 50 bucks
n/a
1 week ago
ya true there are so many arguments and evidence that I legit forget them all
ItCantBeTrollBoy
1 week ago
That's not the only argument. You're lying again. The November market was resolved properly, which is why this one is going to resolve Yes as well.
n/a
1 week ago
5 percent is 500 not 50 fwiw
Phat.
1 week ago
not even 5% like whats the point of buying 10k to win 50 bucks
n/a
1 week ago
I don't make the rules
n/a
1 week ago
Guys let this sink in, if 50pence exits from this market, Yes shares will be worth less than 10cents. Every single person is on No while Two whales are stacking Yes. This is the definition of Truth vs Whale manipulation
n/a
1 week ago
because it's that much of a bond
0x0067e40e99580bB4f48f377786e1f595557578D4-1722634879022
1 week ago
what amazes me still is the number of people betting their life savings on a disputed market just to gain 5%. I've lived through wallstreetbets but this level of risk/reward illiteracy i've never seen.
n/a
1 week ago
no other evidence, just stateslments from the IDF, usa, and a consensus of credible reporting. no biggie
Phat.
1 week ago
0 other evidence
n/a
1 week ago
only degens and ppl who don't know how polymarket works are stacking no
n/a
1 week ago
Guys let this sink in, if 50pence exits from this market, Yes shares will be worth less than 10cents. Every single person is on No while Two whales are stacking Yes. This is the definition of Truth vs Whale manipulation
n/a
0 months ago
she shouldn't be but ppl will overreact to the debate
TheGuru
0 months ago
Kamala should be ahead of Trump, so any order that changes the main market in favour of Kamala is profitable. That makes the incentive to do so substantial
n/a
1 month ago
bruh, no one wants to buy cumalah whorris
n/a
1 month ago
Waltz is such low class filth that we are actually having a debate on whether or not he can speak decently
n/a
1 month ago
fair,it obv can go either way, NO is obv the favorite now even tho it wasnt before, but yes still has a decent shot
n/a
1 month ago
https://mjbizdaily.com/no-marijuana-rescheduling-hearing-until-after-general-election-dea-says/
n/a
1 month ago
Barash added that since the Biden administration’s review of marijuana has been expedited at every stage, the Coalition for Cannabis Scheduling Reform is optimistic the proposed rule will be finalized this year.
n/a
1 month ago
https://mjbizdaily.com/no-marijuana-rescheduling-hearing-until-after-general-election-dea-says/
n/a
1 month ago
https://mjbizdaily.com/no-marijuana-rescheduling-hearing-until-after-general-election-dea-says/
n/a
1 month ago
not even gonna bother wasting my time anymore. I'm literally trying to save u guys money and u don't care so whatever. just give me more money then
kovitalic
1 month ago
I don't understand why YES holders don't sell. They have a big risk right now, and if they did sell, they would have either lost a little or already made enough profit.
n/a
1 month ago
because the market has literally already been decided. read the clarification ffs
kovitalic
1 month ago
I don't understand why YES holders don't sell. They have a big risk right now, and if they did sell, they would have either lost a little or already made enough profit.
n/a
1 month ago
because I thought you guys would take it lower
baal
1 month ago
Why did you sell 40k shares of yes?
n/a
1 month ago
i'll tell you but first you need to buy more NO shares
baalenjoyer
1 month ago
Any actual arguments as to why this should be resolved yes when he said he's not withdrawing?
n/a
1 month ago
why did NO buyers stop buying? If you were buying at 8c then you should be tripling down at 4c. It's the martingale strat
n/a
1 month ago
suspending one's campaign is not a "total withdrawal" either. Politicians use this term just in case they want to get back in, altho none ever do
degenlife
1 month ago
withdrawal = quit , suspension = not rally anymore , remain on the ballot = still on the race . therefore NO
n/a
1 month ago
domer might be the top trader but he's almost always wrong about how polymarket should resolve their markets. And he bought yes because even he knows how it's going to resolve
baal
1 month ago
Top post on this thread #1 trader on poly, stating that he thinks it should be over turned to No if disputed, now buys yes when in process of dispute. Can anyone explain?
n/a
1 month ago
domer might be the top trader but he's almost always wrong about how polymarket should resolve their markets
baal
1 month ago
Whales will scam 500 times and cry when they have to take 1 loss to make the site look like not a total scam. You can continue rigging in the future, atleast make it believable tho
n/a
1 month ago
nikki haley remained on ballots
degenlife
1 month ago
withdrawal = quit , suspension = not rally anymore , remain on the ballot = still on the race . therefore NO
n/a
1 month ago
ur literally the only person here crying
baal
1 month ago
Whales will scam 500 times and cry when they have to take 1 loss to make the site look like not a total scam. You can continue rigging in the future, atleast make it believable tho
n/a
1 month ago
I made a lot of money when I was younger playing online poker
ThatGuyMaybe
1 month ago
out of curiosity. where does the money come from?
n/a
1 month ago
there is no risk, polymarket already ruled
ThatGuyMaybe
1 month ago
I dont understand what kind of person would risk 130k on this. hooly.
n/a
1 month ago
Please dump the price again in 30 min, transferring a bunch more usdc to polymarket in a sec
n/a
1 month ago
be happy and load up on even cheaper yes shares
PolyMucket
1 month ago
What will the YES holders do when RFK Jr specifically says I am NOT dropping out of the Presidential race!
n/a
1 month ago
lawsuit lol
baal
1 month ago
Poly can enjoy the lawsuit and never reaching the mainstream in that case
n/a
1 month ago
suspended does equal withdrawal, that's the language every candidate uses
Tekangu
1 month ago
You can literally vote for him in most states. That is the only evidence you need to know he is not dropping out
n/a
1 month ago
more, like 3. the timer is wrong
n/a
1 month ago
So the review period will last the full 2 days correct?
n/a
1 month ago
other candidates remain on ballots when they suspend their campaigns
Tekangu
1 month ago
You can literally vote for him in most states. That is the only evidence you need to know he is not dropping out
n/a
1 month ago
doesn't matter, he literally said he suspended his campaign.
XiJinPing
1 month ago
RFK confirmed in email TODAY that he is not dropping out https://x.com/GiggityTitties/status/1827397843579011550
n/a
1 month ago
that's not what he said, he said he is suspending his campaign, not fully ending it. Same as all politicians who "suspend" their campaigns, aka all of them
XiJinPing
1 month ago
RFK confirmed in email TODAY that he is not dropping out https://x.com/GiggityTitties/status/1827397843579011550
n/a
1 month ago
nope, suspending campaign=dropping out. Every single politician says they are SUSPENDING their campaign, same as RFK. Sorry for ur loss
Tories4Harris
1 month ago
Edit to anyone who claims suspending campaign = dropping out. RFK jr. stated multiple times. I am suspending my campaign I am not terminating it. terminating = dropping out. Someone who is still hoping to become president can not by fact have dropped out.
n/a
1 month ago
And the market isn't about "ending" his campaign, it's about dropping out/withdrawing, which he did
Bucketshopper
1 month ago
Got no skin in the game but if he really did send out an e-mail explicitly saying he hasn't dropped out and even commented he might end up in the White House with some luck, how is this a Yes?
n/a
1 month ago
it means suspended, that's what it means. And that's what he said. No one who "suspends" their campaign ends it, that's what the word SUSPENDED means.
Bucketshopper
1 month ago
Got no skin in the game but if he really did send out an e-mail explicitly saying he hasn't dropped out and even commented he might end up in the White House with some luck, how is this a Yes?
n/a
1 month ago
suspending your campaign is withdrawing, sorry for your loss. Polymarket already decided
Nah
1 month ago
From an email from the campaign today: I also want you to know that I am only suspending my campaign, not terminating it. My name will still be on the ballot in most states. If you live in a blue state, you can vote for me without harming or helping President Trump or Vice President Harris. In red states — the same applies. I encourage you to do so. And if enough of you vote for me and neither of the major party candidates win 270 electoral votes, I could still end up in the White House in a contingent election.
n/a
1 month ago
suspended campaign=dropping out, that's why
Tories4Harris
1 month ago
Why this should resolve to no: RFK Jr didn't terminate his campaign. He suspended his campaign and pulled his name from ten states and encouraged people to vote for him in the other states. Why? Because he believes that if he stays on the ticket in the battleground states it will give kamala a win. By puling his name he is hoping for a 269-269 tie. If this occurs there would be a contingent election and he could become president. He can't still become president "in his own words" if he dropped out. This is a very clear and factual no. This should resolve to no. The question is will UMA resolve no. When poly resolved yes on a seperate proposal? It would be a bad look if they did but it's the right thing to do.
n/a
1 month ago
suspending campaign=dropping out, doesn't matter that he says it's not "ended." That's what the word SUSPENDED means
Nah
1 month ago
From an email from the campaign today: I also want you to know that I am only suspending my campaign, not terminating it. My name will still be on the ballot in most states. If you live in a blue state, you can vote for me without harming or helping President Trump or Vice President Harris. In red states — the same applies. I encourage you to do so. And if enough of you vote for me and neither of the major party candidates win 270 electoral votes, I could still end up in the White House in a contingent election.
n/a
1 month ago
he did not say that, he said he wasn't ending his campaign. He literally said he was SUSPENDING his campaign. That's called dropping out
Bucketshopper
1 month ago
Got no skin in the game but if he really did send out an e-mail explicitly saying he hasn't dropped out and even commented he might end up in the White House with some luck, how is this a Yes?
n/a
1 month ago
lol there was never a polymarket clarification in either of those
IAmHarold
1 month ago
The final resolution for this is now in UMA's hands. The only way to make your voice heard is through the UMA discord server. https://discord.com/invite/uma Submit your case in #evidence-rationale
n/a
1 month ago
I did buy, can't u see my position? and I'm posting because I'm a nice guy who doesn't want ppl new to this platform to blow their money
IAmHarold
1 month ago
The final resolution for this is now in UMA's hands. The only way to make your voice heard is through the UMA discord server. https://discord.com/invite/uma Submit your case in #evidence-rationale
n/a
1 month ago
even if you convinced uma to go against polymarket, which would never happen, polymarket would emergency resolve it to yes regardless. stop wasting your money
IAmHarold
1 month ago
The final resolution for this is now in UMA's hands. The only way to make your voice heard is through the UMA discord server. https://discord.com/invite/uma Submit your case in #evidence-rationale
n/a
1 month ago
it doesn't matter what your argument is, polymarket has already given their ruling. stop wasting your money
n/a
1 month ago
I know a lot of you are new here but polymarket has literally already decided the market. it's over. it doesn't matter what you say. stop wasting your money
n/a
1 month ago
this situation has happened a zillion times before, they will not and if they did then polymarket would emergency resolve to yes. stop wasting your money
hillary2win
1 month ago
UMA can decide NO
n/a
1 month ago
it doesn't matter, polymarket already ruled. it's over
baal
1 month ago
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/live-blog/kamala-harris-trump-presidential-election-dnc-live-updates-rcna165230
n/a
1 month ago
guys polymarket has already resolved it. stop waiting your time and money
n/a
1 month ago
he overpaid but he's on the winning side. I only bought cumala cuz I knew I could dump them on some sjw delusional sucker
TheOneB
1 month ago
Fredi9999 is wild, 50k in the red and singlehandedly holding 90% of Trump shares
n/a
1 month ago
it will never get through, dump all your shares
Degen2005
1 month ago
Why is this trading at 50 cents? What is it that i am not seeing there? DEA proposed the rescheduling, public had the option to comment... Seems like this should happen any day now. Where am i wrong?
n/a
1 month ago
the odds aren't gonna be close enough to make that possible
benCan
1 month ago
This market seems super ripe for manipulation. Assuming a close election, it is possible for highrollers to tip odds just a bit in the initial market, which could win them big bucks in this market
n/a
1 month ago
there was literally 0 reason for the market to have pumped today fwiw
n/a
1 month ago
no one calls him donald lol
Slaylorswift
1 month ago
Pluralization/possessive of "Trump" will count toward the resolution of this market, however other forms will NOT count. Note for example if "Donald is running for President" is said, it doesn't count as a mention - only "Trump" counts. ONLY TRUMP
n/a
1 month ago
even if that's true which it's not, just means that each speaker will have more time on the podium
dudududududud
1 month ago
Less than half the number of speakers from yesterday are scheduled for today
n/a
1 month ago
it's just not making sense to me at all. hasn't anyone ever heard of the martingale strat?
n/a
1 month ago
Trust the plan
n/a
1 month ago
all of you yes buyers wanted infinite shares at 38c but now it's literally one day later and no one wants to buy at 23c? how does this make sense
n/a
1 month ago
yes, just have to write a letter, which most ppl prob didn't do. doesn't rly matter even if they did as I've alrdy explained
n/a
1 month ago
I'm not sure I fully underatand the processes here, but seems to me you just ave to write a letter, no? https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/05/21/2024-11137/schedules-of-controlled-substances-rescheduling-of-marijuana
n/a
1 month ago
cuz I know u retards will take it lower again
Nancy.Pelosi
1 month ago
Then why are you selling at 54c?
n/a
1 month ago
they haven't though, you need to follow a strict process in order to request one, not just merely state you want one. Moreover, they don't need to give them a hearing, and even if they are granted a hearing, they don't need to listen to anything they say and can just immediately reschedule it right after the hearing.
n/a
1 month ago
I know they can reschedule without a hearing. And yes, several groups and individuals have requested a hearing.
n/a
1 month ago
Damn was hoping for some more cheap shares from all the NO suckers. Oh well, gg
n/a
1 month ago
they can and will, no one even requested a hearing
n/a
1 month ago
I don't think it will happen today. I can't imagine the DEA rescheduling without a hearing, somthing the business insider article glosses over entirely, they only mention the deadline
n/a
1 month ago
damn oops
n/a
1 month ago
you are buying the wrong side
n/a
1 month ago
yes, thats considered no jail
CrispyPete
1 month ago
What happens if he is sentenced to jail but on a suspended sentence? Very common outcome for first time offenders to get, for example, 6 months in jail, suspended. So basically he goes on probation and heads to jail to serve the term if he slips up. Is this still considered a "No Jail"?
n/a
1 month ago
It will never happen
n/a
2 months ago
? what do I know? You just bought a ton of NO. What do you know?
Chrome
2 months ago
what does truthteller know...
n/a
2 months ago
Our great president trump would never fire someone. Easy NO
n/a
2 months ago
im here whats up?
bidendropoutnow
2 months ago
truthteller where arreee youuuu
n/a
3 months ago
Well, I did warn all you cumala YES baggies that I only had a small amount of exit liquidity for you all.
n/a
3 months ago
there won't be any serious person doing that, schumer, clyburn, jeffries, and pelosi already have his back
n/a
3 months ago
The only reason to put out this letter is because you're getting a ton of behind the scenes pressure to drop out. The attacks will only pick up now and they will do everything to get rid of him. Will see how Biden fares...
n/a
3 months ago
you're right, except now the attacks will slow down because now anyone who pressures him is gonna look like an absolute fool. If you want to challenge him, you can challenge him at the convention. Biden has spoken
n/a
3 months ago
The only reason to put out this letter is because you're getting a ton of behind the scenes pressure to drop out. The attacks will only pick up now and they will do everything to get rid of him. Will see how Biden fares...
n/a
3 months ago
prob at the convention you moron
n/a
3 months ago
Congrats to OregonDucks for taking the 12k in exit liquidity I generously provided for cumala YES baggies. Only 9k liquidity left and it's on the books
n/a
3 months ago
I really am. I was expecting this to go on a little longer and was hoping to rebuy because last time some cumala YES idiots took her all the way to 45c, but no such luck unfortunately. That's okay
41-17™askDomerWhatImean
3 months ago
Where is my latest stalker, YUNG DONALD, who has now joined the UNDERWATER CLUB, because he was too BRAINDEAD to sell his Cumala shares at a massive profit? 🤣🤣🤣🤣
n/a
3 months ago
brokeyjoe: that was never my plan, moron
n/a
3 months ago
Congrats to OregonDucks for taking the 12k in exit liquidity I generously provided for cumala YES baggies. Only 9k liquidity left and it's on the books
n/a
3 months ago
damn I remember him, he was gloating about his shares when he should have been taking the exit liquidity I was generously providing him. Too bad for him some other lucky trader took it and now there's absolutely no exit liquidity left
41-17™askDomerWhatImean
3 months ago
Where is my latest stalker, YUNG DONALD, who has now joined the UNDERWATER CLUB, because he was too BRAINDEAD to sell his Cumala shares at a massive profit? 🤣🤣🤣🤣
n/a
3 months ago
Brokeyjoe: I was literally sleeping when the news dropped and got dumped on, moron. Oh wlel
n/a
3 months ago
Congrats to OregonDucks for taking the 12k in exit liquidity I generously provided for cumala YES baggies. Only 9k liquidity left and it's on the books
n/a
3 months ago
exit liquidity all gone, congrats to the lucky baggies who took it
n/a
3 months ago
Congrats to OregonDucks for taking the 12k in exit liquidity I generously provided for cumala YES baggies. Only 9k liquidity left and it's on the books
n/a
3 months ago
Congrats to OregonDucks for taking the 12k in exit liquidity I generously provided for cumala YES baggies. Only 9k liquidity left and it's on the books
n/a
3 months ago
no you don't moron, you capitulated everything at laughably low prices
Smokey-Joe
3 months ago
I got some more huckabee to sell you too. Trump is gonna announce her any day now
n/a
3 months ago
I didn't panic sell anything you braindead clown. I took profits, got ready to reload because I know how braindead cumala yes holders are, and then info changed. Oh well, still made a good 20k
Smokey-Joe
3 months ago
Funny way of saying to panic sold your kamala No's yesterday. Then went and loaded up on Biden No's. And now caught flat footed again
n/a
3 months ago
I warned you cumala yes bag holders that I am the only one providing exit liquidity for you. And I'm only down to 20k shares left. Just put it on the orderbooks for one lucky yes baggy to at least get pennies back on their horrible trade
n/a
3 months ago
Artsipappa: if this is such a concern then someone should have ran against him in the primary
Yfdtu6
3 months ago
I don’t think there is anyway for the dems to unify around Biden after the amount of negative press and calls for him to step down. Maybe he just ends up being completely stubborn and delusional, but any chance of him beating Trump has already been burned by his own side To try to get him to step down
n/a
3 months ago
Presidentbiden: too bad, he won the primary in a landslide and now dems are trying to mount an insurrection to overturn the will of the people.
Yfdtu6
3 months ago
I don’t think there is anyway for the dems to unify around Biden after the amount of negative press and calls for him to step down. Maybe he just ends up being completely stubborn and delusional, but any chance of him beating Trump has already been burned by his own side To try to get him to step down
n/a
3 months ago
it's like 4 months before the election, when everyone finally realizes that biden AIN'T LEAVIN', then they will all be forced to back him again. Except biden certainly won't forget each and every person who betrayed him
Yfdtu6
3 months ago
I don’t think there is anyway for the dems to unify around Biden after the amount of negative press and calls for him to step down. Maybe he just ends up being completely stubborn and delusional, but any chance of him beating Trump has already been burned by his own side To try to get him to step down
n/a
3 months ago
lmfao progpog, this wasn't "trumptards" - it was braindead libs
n/a
3 months ago
Movement to Joe is because of Clyburn?
n/a
3 months ago
tomorrow will be a total flop, very few ppl are dumb enough to go on record telling biden to step down. The insurrection that the dems are trying to mount vs our dear joe biden who won by a landslide in a free and fair election will fail biblically. Pathetic FASCISTS trying to overturn the will of the people
n/a
3 months ago
it's reality setting in and there being no exit ramps left
Gnomezy
3 months ago
I love seeing the panic
n/a
3 months ago
I'm the only person providing cumala YES exit liquidity and it's drying up fast. I might let one lucky YES holder exit at 25c
n/a
3 months ago
yup, biden ain't leavin': was obvious to anyone with a brain 3 days ago
n/a
3 months ago
Movement to Joe is because of Clyburn?
n/a
3 months ago
no I'm not, lol
Smokey-Joe
3 months ago
Truthteller, you are pouring tens of thousands of dollars into what is essentially a "Will Michelle run?" market now. I hope your Sarah Huckabee mind reading skills are up to the task. https://www.thefirsttv.com/watch/sarah-huckabee-sanders-says-she-wont-be-the-vp-nominee/
n/a
3 months ago
thanks, we need it. Apparently basic logic and reasoning is v difficult
n/a
3 months ago
Praying for @truthteller and @MartinShkreliBeliever.
n/a
3 months ago
the article isnt good, but to be fair we had an article like 2 days ago saying that she would accept. I don't like the timing of this new one though, but I'm still hopeful. It's clear that trump really wants sarah, but it's also clear that she really likes her job as gov.
🤺JustKen
3 months ago
After spending hours of his life across many weeks pumping, Smokey Joe retreating on Huckabee like a dirty dumpster dog.
n/a
3 months ago
he literally did share it though: https://twitter.com/MartinShkreli/status/1803824556827615721/photo/1
BigMike11
3 months ago
The problem is, if Martin had definitive evidence, he would have shared it. That he hasn't suggests he doesn't have anything definitive. And that in turn means it is quite unlikely.
n/a
3 months ago
Stop burning your money in this market which requires a ridiculous amount of proof and come bet in the market that actually has a great shot at winning https://polymarket.com/event/was-barron-involved-in-djt?tid=1719193645426
n/a
3 months ago
journalists dont need to post their sources, that's not how journalism works
n/a
3 months ago
Only Mike is claiming involvement and has not provided any evidence or rationale. He said he may in the future if the situation changes, but that's beyond the timeframe of this market.
n/a
3 months ago
yes, there's 0 chance this goes YES, so it's free money
n/a
3 months ago
Can we still bet on this during the dispute period?
n/a
3 months ago
because by the rules of the market we need to wait until the end of June 23
Miklai
3 months ago
How is this not resolved yet?
n/a
3 months ago
Lmao funny but so true
41-17™askDomerWhatImean
3 months ago
That you need to ask a lawyer to do a dictionary's job for you says it all, DA POOP
n/a
3 months ago
you need to be trading in the other market, https://polymarket.com/event/was-barron-involved-in-djt?tid=1719069449094 This market requires definitive conclusive proof, e.g. a statement from Barron himself. The other market only requires a preponderance of evidence.
Ledgerjedi
3 months ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPSNuRXGRC4 More definitive proof of barons involvment in the launch. Resolve yes @polymarket
n/a
3 months ago
And you have no denial from the other side
n/a
3 months ago
the issue is that considering all the evidence, YES is far more likely than NO. You have 100+ pieces of evidence in favor of YES, multiple eye witnesses, a journalist reporting it. All you have for "NO" is that martin is a fraudster and a liar. The problem is that you have OTHER people verifying this story as well.
n/a
3 months ago
the issue is that considering all the evidence, YES is far more likely than NO. You have 100+ pieces of evidence in favor of YES, multiple eye witnesses, a journalist reporting it. All you have for "NO" is that martin is a fraudster and a liar. The problem is that you have OTHER people verifying this story as well.
dacoop1
3 months ago
from my lawyer friend regarding the word "preponderance of evidence": In the Barron Trump and $DJT token scenario, preponderance of evidence would be satisfied if, after considering all the available information, it seems more likely than not (over 50% chance) that Barron Trump was involved. If all the gathered evidence (rumors, indirect claims, circumstantial data) together make it seem more likely than not that Barron Trump was involved, then it meets this standard. Circumstantial data indicating that it is more likely a No vs Yes. Good luck everyone!
n/a
3 months ago
I recommend all yes bettors sell their shares, there will be no definitive proof of trump's involvement coming out within the next 3 hours.
n/a
3 months ago
you'll literally be burning your money. You need trump to come out and say something, as per the rules. Definitive evidence that trump is involved
nawf
3 months ago
i have enough usdc but it wont let me propose a resolution, why is that?
n/a
3 months ago
I'm not the poker truthteller but I was an online professional poker player back in the day, screenname: kelisitaan
Darkmemento
3 months ago
I've done my best to get money onto the site and I can't do it. Anyway here is more proof for the free money currently on offer.
n/a
3 months ago
do a test transfer of 1 dollar to see if it works. Not sure what chain binance uses to transfer USDC
Darkmemento
3 months ago
I've done my best to get money onto the site and I can't do it. Anyway here is more proof for the free money currently on offer.
n/a
3 months ago
this is bad advice. The market rules state that all evidence up until the 23rd will be considered. Even if YES is 100% confident, there could be evidence that comes out against YES. Proposing before the 23rd is too early
n/a
3 months ago
if you're confident(you shouldn't be) you can propose a YES resolution yourself by clicking on 'propose resolution' in the rules section(requires a $750 bond)
n/a
3 months ago
I'm not sure how UMA will resolve, but the answer is obviously YES. We're just betting on whether or not UMA resolves it correctly
yalla
3 months ago
so just to be certain, you think UMA will resolve to yes because pirate news said so but wont show proof or reveal who they talked to?
n/a
3 months ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPSNuRXGRC4 actual journalists confirming that it was barron
n/a
3 months ago
ya, the answer is clearly YES, the only question is how will uma rule
n/a
3 months ago
this is a YES imo but it's interesting how this market will almost definitely resolve to whichever side bets more money
n/a
3 months ago
https://twitter.com/MartinShkreli/status/1803824556827615721/photo/1 and if this screenshot is indeed real, this would mean he's involved in the creation.
n/a
3 months ago
Not just involved. Involved with the "creation" specifically.
n/a
3 months ago
yes, this is true, which can mean many things obviously. Being involved in a zoom call discussing the creation of the coin is being involved in the creation of it
n/a
3 months ago
Not just involved. Involved with the "creation" specifically.
n/a
3 months ago
@BoLoudon1no where in the rules does it say that Barron needs to have spearheaded the coin, simply that he was involved. If what martin is saying is not true, why hasn't anyone on Barron trump's team denied the claim? Or donald?
BigMike11
3 months ago
If Barron Trump really spearheaded the Donald Trump coin, why hasn't Barron Trump said anything at all publicly about this? Or Donald?
n/a
3 months ago
There doesn't need to be hard evidence, soft evidence is enough. That's what a preponderance of evidence means. Simply that there is more evidence for it than against it
BigMike11
3 months ago
you have been rolled by a serial con man who is still on probation. there isn't actually any hard evidence at all that Barron Trump was involved in this, except for the constantly changing story from said con man who you yourself concede has told some whoppers.
n/a
3 months ago
I like money and can read the rules. A prepondeerance of evidence simply means that it is more likely than not that Barron was involved. And there are already 50+ pieces of evidence pointing to barron's involvement and very few pieces if any pointing against it. This market does not require "definitive proof" like the last market. It simply requires "more likely than not" the same standard used in a civil trial. And barron isn't even denying involvement in the slightest
dacoop1
3 months ago
why do you hate money so much
n/a
3 months ago
Well, unfortunately for no holders in this market there's already more than enough evidence already given that makes it more likely than not that Barron is involved. This market doesn't require definitive proof like the old market, simply that it's more likely than a coin flip
BigMike11
3 months ago
No small wonder the Trump team chose to tap the founder and CEO of Shoggoth, and fellow felon, to lead the official Trump $DJT meme coin, and have Barron -- good with computers -- spearhead the whole operation. My only hesitation is that with Friday and Saturday nights coming up, Martin may choose to go out like he did Thursday instead of providing the promised evidence. Too bad this market closes Sunday, and the lawyers put the kebosh on the whole thing after signing off on it. We need a longer duration market.
n/a
3 months ago
this market is a dud, definitive proof will never be released. Go to the other market, which is a clear YES, because it just requires that something is more likely true than not. https://polymarket.com/event/was-barron-involved-in-djt?tid=1718949778992
n/a
3 months ago
To prove an element by a preponderance of the evidence simply means to prove that something is more likely than not. In other words, in light of the evidence and the law, do you believe that each element of his/her [claim/counterclaim] is more likely true than not?
n/a
3 months ago
akro, disagree strongly, martin def has evidence that barron was directly involved in the launch because, well, he was. The only question is whether or not is released publically (or within the 3 day timeline for this market). Period
dacoop1
3 months ago
martin just said that its very possible to trump camp just stays silent about the whole thing. martin just rugged yes guys xddd
n/a
3 months ago
no, martin clearly has the proof. Whether or not he will release it publically is the only question
dacoop1
3 months ago
martin just said that its very possible to trump camp just stays silent about the whole thing. martin just rugged yes guys xddd
n/a
3 months ago
trump campaign is not going to say anything, obviously. It's true so they are definitely not going to deny it cuz that's legit retarded. So they will stay silent
dacoop1
3 months ago
martin just said that its very possible to trump camp just stays silent about the whole thing. martin just rugged yes guys xddd
n/a
3 months ago
we already have a trusted third party, but we don't have definitive evidence publically released that barron has been involved with the launch (yet)
HFGHDH
3 months ago
This plateform is so convoluted it's crazy, the way a judge decide if evidence is definitive or not is by judging proportionally to the evidence, but it seems like the plateform is more oriented toward their own definition of definitive evidence and not actual definitive evidence. It's making the bets rigged.
n/a
3 months ago
it doesn't all depend on the campaign team though, read the rules. If definitive evidence is released publically that barron was involved, it resolves yes, even if he says nothing
dacoop1
3 months ago
martin just said that its very possible to trump camp just stays silent about the whole thing. martin just rugged yes guys xddd
n/a
3 months ago
he didnt tho cuz this market has zero to do with trump, and barron doesn't need to come forward for this to resolve yes. All that's needed is proof of baron's involvement of the launch to be released publically
dacoop1
3 months ago
martin just said that its very possible to trump camp just stays silent about the whole thing. martin just rugged yes guys xddd
n/a
3 months ago
yeah, hes already done this with mario to verify so he will do it again. He has a spaces now, could resolve YES at any moment
0xaf
3 months ago
Martin has to handover his account so it can be verified by a 3rd party. If that happens, this has potential for YES. Otherwise, it's going NO. Unless Barron speaks out, but that is very unlikely.
n/a
3 months ago
The evidence of it needs to be released publically as per the rules
HFGHDH
3 months ago
This plateform is so convoluted it's crazy, the way a judge decide if evidence is definitive or not is by judging proportionally to the evidence, but it seems like the plateform is more oriented toward their own definition of definitive evidence and not actual definitive evidence. It's making the bets rigged.
n/a
3 months ago
If that gets verified by a trusted 3rd party that will be enough
HFGHDH
3 months ago
This plateform is so convoluted it's crazy, the way a judge decide if evidence is definitive or not is by judging proportionally to the evidence, but it seems like the plateform is more oriented toward their own definition of definitive evidence and not actual definitive evidence. It's making the bets rigged.
n/a
3 months ago
Definitive evidence would be a text or something showing Barron being involved in the launch. If that then gets verified
HFGHDH
3 months ago
This plateform is so convoluted it's crazy, the way a judge decide if evidence is definitive or not is by judging proportionally to the evidence, but it seems like the plateform is more oriented toward their own definition of definitive evidence and not actual definitive evidence. It's making the bets rigged.
n/a
3 months ago
Barron needs to have been confirmed to be directly involved in the LAUNCH, as per the rules. That will make it definitive once a reputable source confirms it and it is released publically
djtbetter
3 months ago
what is 'definitive evidence'? we've seen multiple people who claim to work in martins office say the met with baron, the founder of ANKR said he saw cameron on a call with barron, mario on spaces said yesterday essentially 'if this person confirms, then its true' referring to Ryan Fang's (founder of ankr) friend, referred to as 'Mr T' , in addition to all of the screenshots
n/a
3 months ago
Nothing is rigged, the rules of the market are clear
HFGHDH
3 months ago
This plateform is so convoluted it's crazy, the way a judge decide if evidence is definitive or not is by judging proportionally to the evidence, but it seems like the plateform is more oriented toward their own definition of definitive evidence and not actual definitive evidence. It's making the bets rigged.
n/a
3 months ago
Yup, and from what has been said he was. Whether or not proof will be shown is another matter but it prob will.
0xaf
3 months ago
So OK, Barron was involved. 'Directly' will come down to whether Barron said 'OK' to the launch or communicated in some way when it was going to happen.
n/a
3 months ago
Not yet but more will be coming
coughdrop
3 months ago
There is enough evidence to resolve this as yes imo
n/a
3 months ago
I'm aware of the entire situation, thnx
n/a
3 months ago
public service announcement: Key word here is "directly" involved. Definitive evidence of direct involvement seems like a hard bar and goes beyond screenshots of conversation by a known scammer.
n/a
3 months ago
This one is definitely a NO but the Barron trump launch is possibly a YES. Martin has begun leaking screenshots of Barron's involvement
n/a
3 months ago
I'm aware of what the rules say. Have u been listening to the spaces? Barron most likely had direct involvement in the launch. More will be leaked soon
n/a
3 months ago
public service announcement: Key word here is "directly" involved. Definitive evidence of direct involvement seems like a hard bar and goes beyond screenshots of conversation by a known scammer.
n/a
3 months ago
It was more involvement than what ur claiming. It def was direct involvement. Whether or not it will be definitively proven is another matter. But guarantee he will have ppl log into his acct and verify the authenticity. He's alrdy done this
n/a
3 months ago
public service announcement: Key word here is "directly" involved. Definitive evidence of direct involvement seems like a hard bar and goes beyond screenshots of conversation by a known scammer.
n/a
3 months ago
ya I actually do, I listened to everything and he's definitely telling the truth fwiw. He def lied at the beginning about donald trump being involved or whatever but barron was definitely involved to some degree
n/a
3 months ago
public service announcement: Key word here is "directly" involved. Definitive evidence of direct involvement seems like a hard bar and goes beyond screenshots of conversation by a known scammer.
n/a
3 months ago
the leaks won't be stopping here and there are 3 more days. There will be more spaces and more evidence coming out
n/a
3 months ago
public service announcement: Key word here is "directly" involved. Definitive evidence of direct involvement seems like a hard bar and goes beyond screenshots of conversation by a known scammer.
n/a
3 months ago
lol that's actually a good point
Smokey-Joe
3 months ago
Trump is prioritizing the black vote so much that he's made zero mentions of Juneteenth today. Absolutely NONE. Last chance for Byron bagholders to sell.
n/a
3 months ago
reminder: dont click scam links
n/a
3 months ago
reminder dont click scam links
n/a
3 months ago
reminder: do NOT click scam links
n/a
3 months ago
The election will be a compare and contrast: bidenomics vs burgerking
n/a
3 months ago
I have shares of everyone because I'm a market maker and because a lot of them are converted NO shares. I don't pump nor do I need to. It's burgerking. Could still be rubio or sarah but prob not. Bryon is like 3%. No one else stands a chance
Smokey-Joe
3 months ago
Is that why you have hundreds of thousands of shares of everyone?
n/a
3 months ago
I mean the guy legit gave 20 dollar gift cards to everyone just to be on the debate stage. It was always burgerking
n/a
3 months ago
while you were debating which woman trump would find the prettiest, trump was admiring doug "straight outta central casting" burgum
n/a
3 months ago
This is not the democratic party. We choose based on qualifications, not based on race. Just because tim scott is out doesn't mean that the other blaque options are viable. They are not and never were
n/a
3 months ago
you forgot rubio
friendlyguyy
3 months ago
Given up on Scott. Now hedging with Burgum and Vance.
n/a
4 months ago
makemyday, I'm not gonna bother explaining it to u cuz u'll never get it but I suggest turning off newsmax and the rabid MAGA base and start actually listening to trump himself and what he wants from a vp
VibesGreaterRules
4 months ago
Carson to 23!
n/a
4 months ago
think brokeyjoe ran out of cash
VibesGreaterRules
4 months ago
Carson to 23!
n/a
4 months ago
LMFAO, bring him to 20c so I can reshort him again, moron
Smokey-Joe
4 months ago
I see TruthTeller has decide to build a Ben Carson long position starting at 15c. Knowing his panic buying habits, I would not be surprised if Ben Carson is 45c tomorrow.
n/a
4 months ago
keep making random alts and buying ben carson to try and hide your losses. Don't worry, I'm logging them all
Smokey-Joe
4 months ago
I see TruthTeller has decide to build a Ben Carson long position starting at 15c. Knowing his panic buying habits, I would not be surprised if Ben Carson is 45c tomorrow.
n/a
4 months ago
except you used far more than that as well as 3 alts: https://polymarket.com/profile/0x272758e8c634efc1a559aac7b11e1b0889ab1f59 https://polymarket.com/profile/0xce5ff98995c4b64ec6c998db7d590de5a551bc7e?tab=activity https://polymarket.com/profile/0xf46f2936f1371ba370692ca9dc3f384d48d64618?tab=activity
Smokey-Joe
4 months ago
I see TruthTeller has decide to build a Ben Carson long position starting at 15c. Knowing his panic buying habits, I would not be surprised if Ben Carson is 45c tomorrow.
n/a
4 months ago
Well, you'd think that, but brokeyjoe is going to be down 80k lifetime in political betting once sarah sanders loses. Well, that was before he aped into 15k worth of ben carson, so now it will be 95k
n/a
4 months ago
guys, don't fight! You have so much in common! You both have ~240k Sarah shares, and neither of you are bad traders, not as long as DUMFAG DECRAPP is on this website!
n/a
4 months ago
How do you still not know the basics of how polymarket works? You sold me 20k shares at an avg NO price of 81c, and I converted 11k of those shares. Now I'm slowly closing my short just in case you retardedly try to buy him up again tomorrow. Thanks for the money
Smokey-Joe
4 months ago
I see TruthTeller has decide to build a Ben Carson long position starting at 15c. Knowing his panic buying habits, I would not be surprised if Ben Carson is 45c tomorrow.
n/a
4 months ago
biden legit shit his pants again
n/a
4 months ago
I mean people bet their beliefs. At the start of the market there was definitely a pretty good chance she was indeed hacked: gcr's twitter legit got hacked the same day and shilled 2 coins, so would have to be an absolute ridiculous coincidence that jenner didn't get hacked. But it turns out it basically was just a coincidence
chain-goblin
4 months ago
"Chain, the noobs are getting raped in broad daylight. Your beloved 'OGs' are raping them and you still want to give them an airdrop? This is worse than what Ghislaine Maxwell did to those little girls. I'm starting to realize that I invested in the financial equivalent of Epstein's island!!!!"...tbh i was stunned for a few seconds then i snapped out of it and said "wait, haven't you been to Epstein's island?"...he stared at me with his cold blue eyes then turned to his laptop again and continued shouting "and who the hell is decrapp? and why is he innumerate?" but before I got to explain he took a call then we moved to another topic. i think the airdrop allocation is still on the table but go easy on the noobs pls
n/a
4 months ago
It was never ever EVER tulsi crappard
n/a
4 months ago
thanks but I don't think so
Car
4 months ago
Truthteller is the smartest trader on polymarket
n/a
4 months ago
Celeb charged with pumping memecoin before July? https://polymarket.com/event/celebrity-charged-for-pumping-memecoin-before-july?tid=1716946900698
n/a
4 months ago
oh really? lmfao
n/a
4 months ago
She said she wouldn't sell any coins and then dumped six figures, after calling out Sahil for doing the same. Might be a hack, tbh ✌
n/a
4 months ago
Was Iggy Azalea hacked? https://polymarket.com/event/was-iggy-azalea-hacked?tid=1716944632749
n/a
4 months ago
not enough proof!
n/a
4 months ago
"We're going to limit what we say about that shady son of a bitch... all the coins that have been sold, were by that shady son of a bitch"
n/a
4 months ago
nah dude, it's still not enough proof. She needs to go on fox news and say it
n/a
4 months ago
"We're going to limit what we say about that shady son of a bitch... all the coins that have been sold, were by that shady son of a bitch"
n/a
4 months ago
Make sure to play all of the new caitlyn jenner markets that were made today
n/a
4 months ago
guess she was hacked after all
NelsonRodMar
4 months ago
.... https://x.com/Caitlyn_Jenner/status/1795518513144303953
n/a
4 months ago
of course the hacker will say this, her twitter account is still compromised. She is in the process os getting it back
n/a
4 months ago
https://x.com/Caitlyn_Jenner/status/1795517602275692708?t=wwJ5dYY07xrppPM5D-qxBQ&s=19
n/a
4 months ago
Caitlyn jenner will be revealing that she got hacked any minute now.
n/a
4 months ago
there are 3 videos bruh
NelsonRodMar
4 months ago
What I don't understand is that the question is "Was Caitlyn Jenner hacked?" and for you a simple tweet from this same account saying "I'm not hacked" is enough for you
n/a
4 months ago
they are this close to her revealing that she was hacked and the price is at 3c
n/a
4 months ago
Smh, just dumb crypto degens
n/a
4 months ago
What was the point of disputing the market if you're not going full port into shares now that caitlyn said sahil scammed her and she will be revealing the entire story tomorrow?
n/a
4 months ago
now is literally the time to buy yet they are all out of cash to buy
n/a
4 months ago
"FUCK SAHIL! He scammed us! BIG TIME!"
n/a
4 months ago
at these prices you can truly make generational wealth by betting on YES
n/a
4 months ago
guys she literally just said she was scammed by sahil and is going to reveal the truth tomorrow and no one is even buying yes
n/a
4 months ago
even if he released such a statement market would still resolve NO. You'd need for him to claim that the video was a deep fake
qtkaybee
4 months ago
rip, she was not hacked. still at the end of the day, that sahil guy scammed him
n/a
4 months ago
take yes back to 10c
IamNotaBULL
4 months ago
BREAKING: Tommorow Caitlin will issue a statement to clear her name. As having no involvement with any posts made on her Twitter/iG.
n/a
4 months ago
which everyone already knew was going to happen
qtkaybee
4 months ago
rip, she was not hacked. still at the end of the day, that sahil guy scammed him
n/a
4 months ago
buy more
dibc23
4 months ago
"meaning that the recent tweet(s) about $JENNER were posted without her consent or authorization. "
n/a
4 months ago
trump literally already told vivek he won't be his vp pick, not that he was ever an option to begin with
CFTC
4 months ago
Uh oh @bstyrcz2 dont get caught offsides on those Tulsi Bets .... Stick with BOMAMAAAA.
n/a
4 months ago
caitlyn's twitter was hacked but she hasn't realized it yet
n/a
4 months ago
caitlyn jenner will be revealing that she was hacked tomorrow
n/a
4 months ago
this was a great market, it was actually very possible that caitlyn could have been hacked when it was created esp given the gcr incident
n/a
4 months ago
caitlyn will reveal that she was hacked tomorrow
n/a
4 months ago
Buy more yes shares then
IamNotaBULL
4 months ago
Rich the kid was hacked and so was jenner. i am in the telegram of the dev he is going to do another one.
n/a
4 months ago
No, that's really Caitlyn letting everyone on poly market know before she does the big reveal
Siul
4 months ago
bro everyone knows, that you are a 2. Acc of someone who bought Yes :D
n/a
4 months ago
Buy more yes shares then
Rnd
4 months ago
Check out the space, sahil is using richthekid account without his permission. Or you could say hack ? https://x.com/richthekid/status/1795098599279165562?s=46
n/a
4 months ago
After this market closes, we need a new market: Will caitlyn jenner admit she was hacked by June 15th?
n/a
4 months ago
Caitlyn I'm your biggest fan
CaitlynJennersAccount
4 months ago
My team is working to clear this up. These posts were never made by me and a complete scam & hack job.
n/a
4 months ago
Send it back to 75c
n/a
4 months ago
You have 3 days to get out before this market closes. I suggest trying to do so
n/a
4 months ago
The standard of proof has already been met. The only way it would be overruled if somehow it could be proven that the video where she said she wasn't hacked was fake. Which it wasn't. EVEN IF she went back on her word after saying she wasn't hacked wouldn't resolve this market to YES, becuase the market will resolve IMMEDIATELY once she makes the statement that she wasn't hacked. She made that statement
n/a
4 months ago
The standard of proof has already been met. The only way it would be overruled if somehow it could be proven that the video where she said she wasn't hacked was fake. Which it wasn't. EVEN IF she went back on her word after saying she wasn't hacked wouldn't resolve this market to YES, becuase the market will resolve IMMEDIATELY once she makes the statement that she wasn't hacked. She made that statement
n/a
4 months ago
we've seen her next statements: https://x.com/Caitlyn_Jenner/status/1794930706889703555 follow her twitter bruh
Kenz0
4 months ago
let's see her next statement
n/a
4 months ago
UMA doesn't take disputes seriously if the price is sub 10c and you have no proof of anything
depop
4 months ago
this is pretty binary. it either shoots to $1 or gets resolved to 0. the price action inbetween in meaningless
n/a
4 months ago
yes, the video was clearly real, posted on both her instagram and her twitter, and she's had more than 10 hours to come and correct the mistake. It's over
Dulweed
4 months ago
you voted no???
n/a
4 months ago
what other markets are you guys interested in seeing on polymarket?
n/a
4 months ago
twitter is notified of this stuff and takes action quickly
depop
4 months ago
this really has nothing to do with the token and more to do with the account being compromised. token could run even if it was a hack as long as it isnt rugged
n/a
4 months ago
the eyebrows are the proof
n/a
4 months ago
btw if a market is disputed and the price never gets above 10c, you will always lose. So you need to pump the price to 20c to have a chance
n/a
4 months ago
you disputed so now you need to buy more YES shares
n/a
4 months ago
yes, from the account that twitter would have shut down 5 hours ago if it had indeed been hacked
NelsonRodMar
4 months ago
All this NO guy are shaking to loose so they wan't to close market earlier because they now time could play against them
n/a
4 months ago
people just want to free up liquidity, no one is shaking that it won't resolve NO because people know how markets work here. The standard of proof has already been met
NelsonRodMar
4 months ago
All this NO guy are shaking to loose so they wan't to close market earlier because they now time could play against them
n/a
4 months ago
you are not listening. The line: This market will resolve to "No" immediately if Caitlyn Jenner personally and verifiably confirms that she was not hacked. Is there for a reason
DegenShiro
4 months ago
If no definitive evidence is released prior to Tuesday, May 28, 2024, 11:59 PM ET, this market will resolve to "No."
n/a
4 months ago
an eye twitch and a slightly different sounding voice isnt evidence of a deep fake. The videos are of caitlyn, not the manager
Unhasher
4 months ago
I still think its a deepfake :/
n/a
4 months ago
saying she screwed up and fell for a scam would STILL resolve this market NO
DegenShiro
4 months ago
If no definitive evidence is released prior to Tuesday, May 28, 2024, 11:59 PM ET, this market will resolve to "No."
n/a
4 months ago
it is regarded as definitive evidence, that's why the price is at 95c and rising
Haxz0r
4 months ago
Retards betting no havent even considered or asking themselves why the videoes posted by "Jenner" herself isnt regarded as definitive evidence by polymarket, ask yourself why
n/a
4 months ago
because you want it to be. There's legit 0 signs that it is one
Unhasher
4 months ago
I still think its a deepfake :/
n/a
4 months ago
if the videos were "deep fake" caitlyn would have told someone in real life about this by now. It's been 10 hours
DegenShiro
4 months ago
If no definitive evidence is released prior to Tuesday, May 28, 2024, 11:59 PM ET, this market will resolve to "No."
n/a
4 months ago
like has already been said: This market will resolve to "No" immediately if Caitlyn Jenner personally and verifiably confirms that she was not hacked
DegenShiro
4 months ago
If no definitive evidence is released prior to Tuesday, May 28, 2024, 11:59 PM ET, this market will resolve to "No."
n/a
4 months ago
the thing has been going on for almost 10 hours. The market says that it will IMMEDIATELY resolve if she says she was not hacked. She did this. She's had ample time to notify ANYONE that she got hacked
seanc2k
4 months ago
yeah I do agree it's too early to make a decision but don't really want to spend more time on this than I already have, guess SEC is gonna be on Jenner's ass next week. Surprising Jenner would agree to this seeing as how Kardashian got fined 250k for that shitcoin 2 years ago.
n/a
4 months ago
people aren't going to wait when the rules say EXPLICITLY that the market will resolve IMMEDIATELY once she confirms her account has not been hacked, which she has done.
MoistMango12
4 months ago
I'm working on it lol, so annoying it expires in a day, can't they just chill
n/a
4 months ago
she has a phone, she would have told someone and they would have tweeted something about it.
yamcha
4 months ago
shes 100% hacked theres no doubt about that
n/a
4 months ago
the vote is not being stolen, the market literally says that it will resolve IMMEDIATELY to NO if she confirms she was not hacked, which she did
Dulweed
4 months ago
So we need to put up 750 dollars to prevent the vote from getting stolen? How does that work???
n/a
4 months ago
https://x.com/Caitlyn_Jenner/status/1794871722677825952 "My account is real"
Dulweed
4 months ago
No literally trying to force close the vote/steal it rn cuz they don't want time to pass for it to be proven a hack!! Vids are obviously deepfaked and the wallet Caitlyn posted was literally posted by other hacked celebrities??
n/a
4 months ago
then why has she said nothing about being hacked?
yamcha
4 months ago
shes 100% hacked theres no doubt about that
n/a
4 months ago
This market will resolve to "No" immediately if Caitlyn Jenner personally and verifiably confirms that she was not hacked
Dulweed
4 months ago
No literally trying to force close the vote/steal it rn cuz they don't want time to pass for it to be proven a hack!! Vids are obviously deepfaked and the wallet Caitlyn posted was literally posted by other hacked celebrities??
n/a
4 months ago
This market will resolve to "No" immediately if Caitlyn Jenner personally and verifiably confirms that she was not hacked.
n/a
4 months ago
market will be long over by then
Haxz0r
4 months ago
As soon as the SEC knocks on her door she gonna say "hacked"
n/a
4 months ago
the coin is pumping like crazy by the way, so why is she going to say she was hacked again?
n/a
4 months ago
so the new cope is "she wasn't hacked but she will say she was hacked when the coin dumps" got it
n/a
4 months ago
i cant believe i have 76k shares somehow
n/a
4 months ago
she teamed up with some indian guy and launched a coin, cuz crypto
n/a
4 months ago
fake 50pc account but funny
50Pence
4 months ago
I hope everyone enjoyed the show I put on today where I LARPed as someone who cares about the rules and integrity of prediction markets.
n/a
4 months ago
its because one bettor with a large amount of money wants shares and no other reason than this
McDonalds-Employee
4 months ago
Anyone know why Tim Scott recently pulled ahead? For the last week "Other Man" was leading because of Doug.
n/a
4 months ago
she should have always been at zero
Smokeydecoy
4 months ago
Take Tulsi to zero
n/a
4 months ago
the kitty wall crumbles
n/a
4 months ago
radaronline...
n/a
4 months ago
https://radaronline.com/p/nikki-haley-endorses-donald-trump-after-calling-him-disgusting/
n/a
4 months ago
again, you can spam as many links as you want. I've posted at least FIVE credible news sources that say she did NOT endorse trump. Moreover, there are a plethora of news sources that report the story WITHOUT mentioning the word "endorse" at all. This is enough to prove that 1) you do NOT have a consensus of credible media reporting and 2) you did NOT meet the bar of EXPLICITLY endorse, as per the rules.
n/a
4 months ago
again, you can spam as many links as you want. I've posted at least FIVE credible news sources that say she did NOT endorse trump. Moreover, there are a plethora of news sources that report the story WITHOUT mentioning the word "endorse" at all. This is enough to prove that 1) you do NOT have a consensus of credible media reporting and 2) you did NOT meet the bar of EXPLICITLY endorse, as per the rules.
n/a
4 months ago
Nikki Haley Endorses Donald Trump: He's Not Perfect, "But Biden Has Been A Catastrophe" https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2024/05/22/nikki_haley_endorses_donald_trump_hes_not_perfect_but_biden_has_been_a_catastrophe.html
n/a
4 months ago
Wikipedians are volunteers who contribute to Wikipedia by editing its pages, unlike readers who simply read the articles. Anyone—including you—can become a Wikipedian by boldly making changes when they find something that can be added or improved. This means nothing
n/a
4 months ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Donald_Trump_2024_presidential_campaign_endorsements
n/a
4 months ago
thanks for your honesty, really honorable of you, and I appreciate it immensely. It sucks to lose but it's really in everyone's best interest overall that polymarket resolves markets correctly
n/a
4 months ago
unfortunately truthteller has successfully converted a second person (me)
n/a
4 months ago
that's so funny, if it's right then how come UMA snap disputed it when it got proposed?
n/a
4 months ago
I was kinda amazed that you thought it was a good idea to sell 80c YESes on an event that had already happened, that's true.
n/a
4 months ago
actually it seems like you're the bag holder, you read one source, bought at 80c and thought YES was a lock when it wasn't because you didn't understand the rules and the market correctly.
n/a
4 months ago
Fortunately for the lone NO bag holder, there are still like 2 days before UMA resolves this YES, so you can still find someone to dump your shares on, you're not dead yet.
n/a
4 months ago
Fortunately for YES bag holders, May still has like 6 days left. She still can clarify her statement, so you're not dead yet
n/a
4 months ago
fortunately it's not about the number of people who agree or disagree with you, it's about whether or not the argument is correct. Buy more shares if you have conviction
n/a
4 months ago
so far I have heard many people say this should be a YES. the only person arguing in favor of NO is the person who holds all the NO shares. i'm sure if they comment the same exact thing a few more times they will eventually get a second person to agree with them.
n/a
4 months ago
well, at least 5 credible news sources disagree with you, so we have no consensus. Therefore, YES loses. Simple
n/a
4 months ago
she's saying he is the best candidate in the election, that is an endorsement of voting for him. if she then gives him some advice about how she would like him to act, that does not take away from the fact that she is endorsing him as the superior candidate
n/a
4 months ago
they aren't, she didn't tell her voters to vote for him. That's what an endorsement is. All she said was that SHE HERSELF was voting.
n/a
4 months ago
as far as I'm concerned, her words, the primary resolution source, already constitute an explicit endorsement. the multitude of media sources agreeing with me are just icing on the cake
n/a
4 months ago
again, you have no consensus, all you have is some random podcast person saying it. There is NO EXPLICIT ENDORSEMENT, and there is NO CONSENSUS around it. READ THE RULES. 50% IS NOT ENOUGH
n/a
4 months ago
but nor do they explicitly deny that she endorsed him. and here, they do say "endorsed" https://edition.cnn.com/audio/podcasts/5-things/episodes/276a2e3e-a990-11ee-8579-9788b75a464e
n/a
4 months ago
@Dr_randall_c...furthermore, the ABSENCE of the words "nikki endorses" in articles such as these https://edition.cnn.com/2024/05/22/politics/nikki-haley-donald-trump/index.html NOT A SINGLE MENTION OF NIKKI HALEY ENDORSING TRUMP
n/a
4 months ago
once again, "explicitly" DOES NOT mean that she has to use the word "endorse"
n/a
4 months ago
lol? I linked face the nation, FOX, newsnation, THESE ARE NOT RANDOM NEWS SOURCES
n/a
4 months ago
it does not in fact say that. it says that a consensus of credible reporting is ONE source that may be used. but in any case, it's clear that the MAJORITY of CREDIBLE media sources recognize here as having endorsed trump: fox, cnn, etc. that's why you have to dig up random sites like "19ththenews" to support your position
n/a
4 months ago
yes, the PRIMARY resolution source was nikki haley, and no where did she use the word ENDORSE. Therefore, we move onto the secondary sources
n/a
4 months ago
it does not in fact say that. it says that a consensus of credible reporting is ONE source that may be used. but in any case, it's clear that the MAJORITY of CREDIBLE media sources recognize here as having endorsed trump: fox, cnn, etc. that's why you have to dig up random sites like "19ththenews" to support your position
n/a
4 months ago
The rules of the market make it VERY clear what the standard for endorsement was: an EXPLICIT endorsement that was recognized by a CONSENSUS of credible reporting. You do not have this
n/a
4 months ago
https://19thnews.org/2024/05/nikki-haley-voting-trump-election-2024/
n/a
4 months ago
It doesn't matter how many sources you post, I've posted FIVE sources that say she did NOT endorse him. There is NO consensus, there is NO EXPLICIT endorsement, AS PER THE RULES.
n/a
4 months ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WI-sc51XJpQ
n/a
4 months ago
It doesn't matter how many sources you post, I've posted FIVE sources that say she did NOT endorse him. There is NO consensus, there is NO EXPLICIT endorsement, AS PER THE RULES.
n/a
4 months ago
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6353484934112
n/a
4 months ago
It doesn't matter how many sources you post, I've posted FIVE sources that say she did NOT endorse him. There is NO consensus, there is NO EXPLICIT endorsement, AS PER THE RULES.
n/a
4 months ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OvNyDxpJk0
n/a
4 months ago
It doesn't matter how many sources you post, I've posted FIVE sources that say she did NOT endorse him. There is NO consensus, there is NO EXPLICIT endorsement, AS PER THE RULES.
n/a
4 months ago
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ck77rvmp8xno
n/a
4 months ago
It doesn't matter how many sources you post, I've posted FIVE sources that say she did NOT endorse him. There is NO consensus, there is NO EXPLICIT endorsement, AS PER THE RULES.
n/a
4 months ago
It doesn't matter how many sources you post, I've posted FIVE sources that say she did NOT endorse him. There is NO consensus, there is NO EXPLICIT endorsement, AS PER THE RULES.
n/a
4 months ago
doesnt matter, no consensus of credible reporting, AS PER THE RULES.
n/a
4 months ago
https://www.realclearpolling.com/stories/analysis/will-haleys-trump-endorsement-encourage-her-supporters-to-follow-suit
n/a
4 months ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WI-sc51XJpQ Face the nation: Nikki Haley says she'll vote for Trump, but stops short of endorsement
n/a
4 months ago
Will Nikki Haley endorse Trump? 'Fox News @ Night' panelists Amber Duke and Erin Perrine weigh in on Nikki Haley saying she'll be voting for former President Trump and the House GOP claiming Hunter Biden lied under oath.
n/a
4 months ago
the sources you posted are hardly mainstream sources. CNN and Fox are far more credible and both have stated that Haley endorsed trump
n/a
4 months ago
not in their original articles, read
n/a
4 months ago
the sources you posted are hardly mainstream sources. CNN and Fox are far more credible and both have stated that Haley endorsed trump
n/a
4 months ago
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/05/22/politics/nikki-haley-donald-trump/index.html no mention of any endorsmeent
n/a
4 months ago
Also those CNN and fox stuff are burried deep, not even the main articles which specifically have NO mention of endorsement
n/a
4 months ago
Also those CNN and fox stuff are burried deep, not even the main articles which specifically have NO mention of endorsement
n/a
4 months ago
And since the markets require an EXPLICIT endorsement, without room for doubt, and there are at least THREE sources showing doubt, gg
n/a
4 months ago
And since the markets require an EXPLICIT endorsement, without room for doubt, and there are at least THREE sources showing doubt, gg
n/a
4 months ago
Nikki Haley says she’ll vote for Trump — but doesn’t quite endorse him
n/a
4 months ago
https://19thnews.org/2024/05/nikki-haley-voting-trump-election-2024/
n/a
4 months ago
Haley says she’s voting for Trump, stops short of endorsement | NewsNation Now
n/a
4 months ago
Despite zzz2321's spam to the contrary, there is nothing "wishy-washy" or uncertain about stating your intention to vote for someone: it is completely explicit, with no room for doubt. And mainstream media sources confirm this interpretation. Here is CNN: : ''PM ET: Haley endorses Trump, Uvalde families' settlement, Weinstein accuser speaks out & more'' https://edition.cnn.com/audio/podcasts/5-things/episodes/276a2e3e-a990-11ee-8579-9788b75a464e
n/a
4 months ago
The problem YES holders have is that they need the endorsement to be EXPLICIT, as per the rules, with NO ROOM FOR DOUBT OR UNCERTAINTY. I've posted multiple pieces of evidence citing uncertainty, therefore YES loses
n/a
4 months ago
again, wishy/washy, NOT explicit as PER THE RULES
n/a
4 months ago
I give you Fox news: ''Nikki Haley endorses Trump in presidential vote | LiveNOW from FOX''https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0aT-0U9rzM
n/a
4 months ago
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ck77rvmp8xno "Speculation is now likely to grow over whether Ms Haley will formally mend ties with Mr Trump and endorse him."
n/a
4 months ago
EXPLICIT: stated clearly and in detail, leaving no room for confusion or doubt. CNN not reporting endorsement, fox not reporting endorsement, thereforefore there IS confusion and doubt, NO wins. Easy logic
n/a
4 months ago
what are u talking about? who cares who she votes for, this market is about whether she endorses him
n/a
4 months ago
yes, saying she will vote for him IS explicit. the thing that is in question is whether she will support his presidential bid, by saying she will vote for him she is explicitly doing so
n/a
4 months ago
read the rules. It needs to be EXPLICIT
n/a
4 months ago
publicly declaring you will vote for someone is in fact an endorsement. "an act of giving one's public approval or support to someone or something."
n/a
4 months ago
like cnn?
n/a
4 months ago
it was explicit enough for the mainstream media
n/a
4 months ago
voting for someone is not an endorsment
n/a
4 months ago
yes, she said she was going to vote for him, no ambiguity there
n/a
4 months ago
The meaning of EXPLICITLY is in an explicit manner : clearly and without any vagueness or ambiguity. How to use explicitly in a sentence.
n/a
4 months ago
you should learn what the word explicitly means
n/a
4 months ago
Consensus of credible reporting has clearly been reached. Halley endorsed Trump.