Who or what will President Trump go after before the end of 2025?
➕
Plus
181
Ṁ77k
Jan 1
99%
Jimmy Kimmel
99%
Jack Smith
99%
The New York Times (NYT)
99%
Miles Taylor
99%
Stephen Colbert
99%
John Bolton
99%
James Comey
99%
Solar Energy
92%
Zohran Mamdani
90%
National Institutes of Health
83%
Leakers
83%
JB Pritzker
81%
Panama
76%
The Metropolitan Museum of Art
72%
Progressive YouTube Influencers
70%
Wind Energy
69%
Alexander Vindman
69%
The Atlantic
60%
Michael Cohen
59%
Public Libraries

Between inauguration day and the end of the year.

‘Go after’ in the sense of making their lives difficult in some public way, causing them financial hardship, etc.. In most cases, a post or something spoken during an interview only will not count, will have to be accompanied by some specific action. I will be the final judge of any edge-cases but will read any sources or arguments made in the comments.

Let’s see where this goes. N/As on added items that are ridiculously broad or way too difficult to prove.

If not elected, not elected resolves yes, everything else no immediately after election results.

  • Update 2025-02-01 (PST): 'Going after someone' includes actions taken against loyalists, such as Liz Cheney & Jan 6 Committee. (AI summary of creator comment)

  • Update 2025-07-02 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): In response to a question about what action would qualify for the 'Biden's family' option, the creator gave an example: removing Secret Service protection.

Get Ṁ1,000 play money
Sort by:
bought Ṁ100 James Comey YES
Jimmy Kimmel
bought Ṁ230 Jimmy Kimmel YES

@CryptoNeoLiberalist Resolves YES?

The New York Times (NYT)
bought Ṁ784 The New York Times (... YES
bought Ṁ10 Answer #ycpzRlENhL YES

RFK Jr on the mass shooting in Minnesota: "We're launching studies on the potential contribution of some of the SSRI drugs and some of the other psychiatric drugs that might be contributing to violence." https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lxhkplfx7j2g

@CryptoNeoLiberalist You’ve got to be fucking kidding me.

reposted

@CryptoNeoLiberalist You’ve got to be fucking kidding me.

bought Ṁ50 Answer #9bc059a0ab34 YES

Seems likely to me

I haven't verified these myself, but perhaps they should all resolve YES:

Zohran Mamdani

I'm confused by some of these. for example, how did he go after Biden's family, and why does it seem so likely that he'll go after Beyonce?

bought Ṁ165 Answer #tAn6L5uULA YES

@ZaneMiller Removed secret service protection or something like that.

@Predictor this should resolve yes already.

Trump even doubled down today https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114776149269773065

@dgga Why, what’s up with it?

Solar Energy

About 43% of all solar energy is on farmland, according to the USDA. A targeted disincentive for renewables on farmland is a major blow to solar and wind. https://heatmap.news/plus/the-fight/spotlight/trump-targets-solar-on-farmland

@Marnix From that article it only looks like federal money going towards solar energy will be disincentivized if it conflicts in some way with agricultural interests. I'm uncertain whether that counts as causing financial hardship or merely no longer contributing financial support.

Another way of looking at this is whether we frame in terms of Trump the person (who is also US president) or the President of the United States officially acting as the embodiment of Federal Government (who is also Trump the individual).

since the criteria includes financial hardship: these birds are singled out for tariffs as the only residents of their island! https://www.wired.com/story/trump-tariffs-antarctic-islands-heard-mcdonald/

bought Ṁ2 Answer #9d03b1c07eff NO

why was 'Universities' resolved?