What will happen before May 1, 2025? The rules for specific markets are in the comments.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Read below:
Should there be a dispute, the rules in the comments or those that have been otherwise provided will control over the answer to the question itself. While, the question is intended to provide an easy way for people to bet on their beliefs, it is not the end all be all, and all traders should look at the rules. Please don't hesitate to ask clarifying questions in the comments. In the unlikely event of significant ambiguity regarding whether the resolution criteria have been met. I reserve the right to resolve a question to a percentage that I deem fair. I will give notice before I do this.
I will issue a full analysis of my reasoning for resolving a market within 24 hours after I resolve it. If you are dissatisfied with a resolution, please wait for the full analysis, and then leave a comment or message me before leaving a bad review of my resolution.
______________________________________________________________________________________________
On Adding Answers:
I reserve the right to N/A any answer that is not in keeping with the spirit of this market
Answers must have clear criteria for resolving
No meta markets will be allowed (i.e. more than 10 answers resolved to "yes")
I will remain the decision-maker on the resolution of all markets. Any statement to the contrary in a market title will be removed.
If an answer is added after that answer has already satisfied the criteria to resolve "Yes" or "No" that answer will resolve N/A
I will message the creator of a market that I do not believe conforms with rule number two on adding answers (that all answers must have clear criteria for resolving) and they will have 24 hours to provide a clear criteria for resolving (I will help create criteria) or else their submission will be N/A'ed. If there is a market that is possibly subject to N/A I will make that clear once I give the 24 hour notice to the creator of the market.
If the criteria for an answer are satisfied before Donald Trump takes office that answer will not resolve unless it is impossible for that answer to resolve yes or no after Trump takes office in which case that answer will resolve N/A.
Please note: that given the somewhat ambiguous of some markets, I will not trade on this market.
Update 2025-09-01 (PST): - YES if:
Section 3 or 4 of the 25th Amendment is invoked
Death of the President
Resignation of the President
Removal from office (AI summary of creator comment)
Update 2025-11-01 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Definitions
Eliminate Mandates: For this market, "eliminate mandates" means that Trump signs an executive order, law, or any other legally binding action that effectively ends federal vaccine mandates within the specified timeframe.
The action must be documented in official government releases (e.g., executive orders, laws passed and signed, federal agency directives).
State-level vaccine mandate changes do not count unless directly tied to federal action.
Statements, promises, or intentions without binding action do not qualify.
Vaccine Mandates: Rules or regulations that require individuals or groups to receive any vaccines to participate in activities, employment, or access certain public services, as instituted by federal law or regulation. To be clear, this requires the removal of any enforceable requirements compelling individuals to receive vaccinations, requiring vaccination to receive government benefits or employment, or penalizing non-compliance.
Update 2025-11-01 (PST): - A federal death row inmate is executed by the federal government. (AI summary of creator comment)
Update 2025-15-01 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Resolution Criteria for Cease-Fire within Trump's First 100 Days:
Cease-fire Date: The date the cease-fire is entered into is the only date that matters.
14-Day Period: If a cease-fire is entered into before the first 100 days, but the required 14-day period for the cease-fire not to be breached overlaps into the first 100 days, the market will not necessarily resolve to "Yes".
Multiple Cease-fires: Another cease-fire agreement entered into within Trump's first 100 days, including one that builds on prior agreements, will count.
Hostilities: Continuing hostilities are not necessary for a cease-fire to count.
Update 2025-23-01 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Impeachment Resolution:
The date used will be the date the House of Representatives adopts a resolution impeaching Donald J. Trump.
The market will not resolve until it is clear the resolution won't be rescinded, which is shown by either a motion to reconsider being laid on the table or the signing of the resolution.
If a resolution of impeachment and articles of impeachment are adopted separately, the time of the impeachment resolution's adoption will control.
Update 2025-28-01 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Resolution Criteria for 'Executive order ejecting transgender people serving in the military':
Ejectment of transgender individuals from the armed forces.
Requirement that transgender individuals serve under their sex assigned at birth rather than their gender identity.
Update 2025-02-08 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Update from creator
The market will resolve to Yes if the list of cabinet officials is updated to include a new position within the first 100 days of Trump's time in office.
Update 2025-02-10 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Update from creator
The market resolves Yes if the Trump administration explicitly refuses to comply with a binding court order issued by a U.S. federal or state court.
Definition of "Ignore a Court Order":
Defying an injunction: Continuing an action that a court has ordered to stop or not doing what the court ordered.
Refusing to enforce a ruling: Not acting on a mandate requiring specific action.
Publicly declaring noncompliance: Making a public statement that the administration will not comply with a specific court order.
Exclusions:
Filing an appeal or seeking a stay without simultaneously ignoring the order does not count.
Delays in compliance due to bureaucratic processes do not count unless they are willful and explicit.
Statements criticizing the court order without actual noncompliance do not count.
Update 2025-02-11 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Update from creator
Tariffs Resolution Clarification
General Tariffs: Tariffs applied to all countries generally will not count, even if there are exceptions for a few specific countries.
Specific Tariffs: Only tariffs that explicitly name Panama (though not necessarily exclusively) will count.
Update 2025-02-11 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Clarification on Crash Counting:
If a single incident involves multiple jets (for example, one jet colliding with another while landing), it should be counted as a single crash.
Update 2025-02-12 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Official resolution criteria for jet crashes:
The market resolves YES if three or more jet crashes occur in the United States in the first 100 days of Trump’s administration.
Each incident is counted as one crash, in keeping with the natural use of the term.
Jet crashes must meet FAA guidelines and industry standards.
Incidents qualifying as jet crashes include:
2025 Potomac River mid-air collision
Med Jets Flight 056
Learjet 35A crash at Scottsdale Airport in Arizona
Note that non-jet crashes (e.g., Bering Air Flight 445) do not count.
Update 2025-02-18 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Pope Francis Definition Update
Sede Vacante Trigger: Pope Francis will no longer be considered Pope once the Holy See (Diocese of Rome) enters a period of sede vacante.
Update 2025-02-19 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Clarification on Papal Definition:
Habemus papam Announcement: A person is considered to have been made pope at the moment the Habemus papam announcement is made.
Update 2025-02-19 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Update from creator
Clarification on LMSYS Leaderboard Measurement:
Only the result for the number one on the LMSYS leaderboard at day 100 (Wednesday, April 30, 2025 at 12:00:00 noon ET) will be considered.
Outcomes from any time before this specified moment will not be used in resolution.
@traders this is the last message tagging everyone that I anticipate to issue before the market closes because I know it is annoying. Thank you for trading on this market. I really appreciate it. I just want to remind everyone of the following:
Should there be a dispute, the rules in the comments or those that have been otherwise provided will control over the answer to the question itself. While, the question is intended to provide an easy way for people to bet on their beliefs, it is not the end all be all, and all traders should look at the rules. Please don't hesitate to ask clarifying questions in the comments. In the unlikely event of significant ambiguity regarding whether the resolution criteria have been met. I reserve the right to resolve a question to a percentage that I deem fair. I will give notice before I do this.
I will issue a full analysis of my reasoning for resolving a market within 24 hours after I resolve it. If you are dissatisfied with a resolution, please wait for the full analysis, and then leave a comment or message me before leaving a bad review of my resolution.
Thanks again!
@SteveSokolowski In accordance with the UK's long tradition of abiding by the phrase "The king is dead, long live the king!" and the principle of Rex nunquam moritur, William will be considered king immediately upon the death of King Charles III or the effective date of King Charles III's instrument of abdication, absent the death of Prince William prior to the death of King Charles III or his removal from the line of succession to the crown by an act of parliament.
@SteveSokolowski to be clear this only refers to what is number one on the LMSYS leaderboard on day 100 (Wednesday, April 30, 2025 at 12:00:00 noon ET) and not any day before.
@SteveSokolowski for the purposes of this market, somebody will be considered to have been made pope the moment the Habemus papam announcement is made.
Unfortunately, these things always end up worse than they appear because insiders hide information - see Queen Elizabeth:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/public-safety-and-emergencies/health-and-safety-alerts/ar-AA1zhQGZ
@SteveSokolowski For the purposes of this market Pope Francis will no longer be considered Pope as soon as the Holy See (aka the Diocese of Rome) enters a period of sede vacante. To be clear the peirod of sede vacante begins the moment the pope dies or the moment the pope's resignation is effective. The pope's resignation need not be accepted by anyone. See Cann. 332 §2.
@DSalomon please provide a clear and objective way to resolve this question or else this will be N/A'd
@AaronSimansky just N/A
If you want to make it clearer and post yourself pls do,
I have dyslexia and not being able to see makes it very confusing.
Have a good one 👍
@DSalomon I also have dyslexia. If you want, I can help you find objective criteria or if you wanna propose another answer. I'm willing to help you find a better and more objective way to phrase it.
@AaronSimansky Thank you. But for now I'm just gonna do a lot more reading to understand better the format here, it's alot kinda overwhelming.
Please use yourself if u like.
Really appreciate the offer 🙏
Not sure if worded properly, can't see what you write.
I am well aware of the fact that both countries will suffer significantly, however I believe that tariffs are used to collapse another countries economy so as to be able to annex the other country.
I think Canada would move back into igloos before giving in.
If this question is not within the rules do not hesitate to pull it.
Still learning....lol.
Future generations will look back on us and say...
@SteveSokolowski
Official opinion on the resolution of this market
This market resolved yes if three or more jet crashes occurred in the United States in the first 100 days of the Trump administration. Each incident was considered one crash in keeping with the way that the word crash is naturally used in English. The three crashes that were used to resolve this market were:
2025 Potomac River mid-air collision
Med Jets Flight 056
Learjet 35A crash at Scottsdale Airport in Arizona
All these qualify as jet crashes in accordance with FAA guidelines and industry standards.
The Bering Air Flight 445 crash did not count because that plane was not a jet.
@SteveSokolowski A jet hit a jet while landing. Is that one jet crash or two?
@Quroe If you had believed that jet crashes were independent trials, then I would argue that is an incorrect stance to take. It would also be incorrect to believe that if one crash occurs, it's less likely for a second to follow soon.
Whatever factors had caused the first crash are likely to also be present for additional crashes until an investigation was completed.
@Marnix for the purposes of this question tariffs placed on all countries generally will not count even if there are exceptions for a few set countries. The only tariffs that will count or ones that name Panama specifically (though not necessarily exclusively).
@DSalomon this answer was not in keeping with the spirit of the market. If you want to have an answer that is clearer about its resolution, you can try again. Also, please confine your answer to stating a a specific event for resolution and avoid editorializing
Man
I can't even imagine what the answer might be, He's going to ostracize the US for sure, after the world turns there back on the US ????
He already thinks he is a God.
He personally earned 58 billion from the public, the bros did better.
Canada has had 40 to 400 lbs of fetal cross border and deficit is 40 billion and Trump negotiated Canada and Mexican trade agreement. Forced both countries to the table in first term.
The "Trump administration ignores a court order" market is resolved to YES on the following basis:
Reasoning:
Existence of a Court Order:
The court issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) that explicitly prohibited the Trump administration from freezing federal funding.
Noncompliance with the Order:
The court found that, despite receiving clear and unambiguous notice of the TRO, the administration continued to freeze federal funds in violation of the order.
The court stated that "the Defendants in some cases have continued to improperly freeze federal funds and refused to resume disbursement of appropriated federal funds."
Court's Interpretation:
The court ruled that the administration's actions violated the plain text of the TRO.
The ruling explicitly rejects the administration’s defense, stating that their justification (rooting out fraud) did not exempt them from compliance.
Since the resolution criteria define "ignoring a court order" as explicit noncompliance with a binding court ruling (without a valid stay or appeal preventing enforcement), this case meets that threshold. Thus, the market would resolve as "Yes."