Who will Trump publicly insult by October 31?

Según los datos más recientes del mercado de predicción para la consulta “Who will Trump publicly insult by October 31?”, los operadores han formado un fuerte consenso.

Actualmente, Joe Biden domina el mercado con una abrumadora probabilidad de victoria del 9910%. Barack Obama le sigue en segundo lugar con 9900%, mientras que Letitia James se sitúa tercero con 7450%. El volumen de apuestas de este mercado ya alcanza $1,3K, lo que refleja un enorme interés.

Para evaluar mejor la posición de cada resultado posible, el mercado puede segmentarse en tres niveles de negociación según la probabilidad implícita y el precio de los contratos:

🥇 Nivel 1: El líder dominante

• Joe Biden (9910%): Con la probabilidad más alta, Joe Biden cuenta con un fuerte respaldo del libro de órdenes. Quienes quieran apostar por este resultado se enfrentan a un precio de contrato “Buy Yes” de 9910¢, señal de una gran convicción del mercado. Solo este contrato ha generado $599 de volumen.

🥈 Nivel 2: Los principales aspirantes

• Barack Obama (9900%): Como la alternativa más viable, Barack Obama mantiene una probabilidad del 9900% de resolverse a favor. Sus acciones “Buy Yes” cotizan actualmente a 9900¢.
• Letitia James (7450%): En tercer lugar con una probabilidad del 7450%, el mercado muestra un escepticismo prudente hacia Letitia James, tratándolo como un comodín externo salvo que cambie el impulso.

🥉 Nivel 3: Las opciones de cola larga (suman ~0%)

Más allá de las tres primeras opciones, se sigue un amplio campo de variables macro y resultados poco probables. Aunque sus probabilidades individuales son bajas, son coberturas clave para los operadores especulativos:

• Opciones alternativas: Esto incluye Jon Ossoff (7450%), Mark Carney (7450%) y Elizabeth Warren (7450%).
• Volumen especulativo: A pesar de su baja probabilidad estadística, ciertos contratos de cola larga como Jerome Powell siguen atrayendo un interés notable.

This market will resolve to "Yes" if Donald Trump makes any public statement in which he insults the listed individual between market creation and the specified date (ET). Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No".

A public statement is any written, verbal, or recorded statement which is either made in a public setting, published by the speaker, or on the record to media, and the direct language of which is made publicly available within the specified timeframe. Pre-recorded public statements will count for the date (ET) that they are made publicly available. Statements made in private that are subsequently leaked will not qualify, even if credibly reported. Narrations and paraphrasings do not qualify.

Images and videos posted on verified social media accounts will only qualify if they contain insulting language clearly directed at the individual, whether within the content itself or in an accompanying caption. Language within the content of a video will only qualify if Donald Trump is clearly portrayed as saying it. Insulting language within the content of a video said by anyone other than Donald Trump or a portrayal thereof will not qualify.

A quote post will qualify if added language independently qualifies as an insult, or endorses insulting language directed at the individual within the quoted post; a repost of another account's post will not qualify.

A public statement qualifies as an insult if it mocks, degrades, or disparages the individual either personally or professionally. This includes calling the individual a clearly insulting trait (e.g., weak, stupid, disloyal, a failure), using an insulting nickname (e.g., Crooked Hillary), using other clearly derogatory language, or using the negative form of a positive trait in a clearly derogatory manner (e.g., “He isn’t smart”, “He has no judgment”). Disparaging the individual in their professional capacity will qualify (e.g., "He is a disaster candidate," "He is terrible at his job"); however, negative comments directed at the individual's specific actions, policies, or decisions will not qualify (e.g., "He has bad policies," "He is wrong about healthcare").

A statement made in direct reference to the individual will qualify even if they are not named, so long as it is reasonably clear from context that they are the subject.

The resolution sources will be public statements made by Donald Trump and a consensus of credible reporting.