First Debate Trump-isms Megamarket: Which exact words/phrases will Trump say?
➕
Plus
292
249k
resolved Jun 30
Resolved
YES
"Tremendous"
·
25d
Resolved
YES
"Billions and billions"
·
25d
Resolved
YES
"Make America Great Again"
·
25d
Resolved
YES
"Losers" OR "suckers"
·
23d
Resolved
YES
“Retribution”
·
22d
Resolved
YES
“Obama”
·
21d
Resolved
YES
"Greatest economy in history" OR "greatest economy in the history of"
·
24d
Resolved
YES
"Winning"
·
25d
Resolved
YES
“Hunter”
·
18d
Resolved
YES
"A great guy"
·
24d
Resolved
NO
"Drain the swamp"
·
25d
Resolved
NO
"Many, many"
·
25d
Resolved
NO
"Laughing at us"
·
25d
Resolved
NO
"Corrupt Left"
·
23d
Resolved
NO
"Many, many, many"
·
22d
Resolved
NO
“CNN”
·
15d
Resolved
NO
"Fake news"
·
25d
Resolved
NO
"Most beautiful"
·
23d
Resolved
NO
“Rigged trial”
·
23d
Resolved
NO
“Weaponize(d)”
·
22d

Resolution

These options resolve YES if Trump says the exact sequence of words at the first debate. Examples:

  • "Winner", "won", or "winnings" do not count for "winning".

  • "Laughing at all of us" would not count for "laughing at us".

However this only refers to the sequence of words, any punctuation is fine—"horrible radical, left lunatic" does count for "radical left".

To help find these, I plan to check the transcript from the CPD website. But the transcript won't necessarily be the ultimate source (e.g. it might slightly diverge in spelling, punctuation, usage of contractions, etc)—as long as it sounds like he said the phrase in the debate audio (and not some other word), I will err on the side of YES.

Background

  • This market refers to the first debate held between Biden & Trump in 2024, as long as it is before July 31st (currently: June 27th, on CNN).

    • If the debate is cancelled or postponed beyond then, I will ask the mods to N/A this market, as I don't want to lock up mana for the next 5 months.

  • This market will close before the first debate begins (to recoup liquidity).

  • You can add your own submissions, but note that it costs 1000M (this is a Plus market), and I reserve the right to N/A any that don't follow the current format (or for any reason).

    • Submissions don't need to explicitly be "Trump-isms"—e.g. you can add "Venezuela" or "Artificial intelligence" if you want to bet that he'll mention them. It just needs to be a sequence of words.

    • For more general betting on "what will happen in the debate", check out @ManifoldPolitics 's official prop bet market.

Examples

Does not count:

  • "Winner", "won", or "winnings" do not count for "winning".

  • "Radical leftism" does not count for "radical left".

  • "Illegal immigrants" or "illegal migrant" does not count for "illegal migrants".

  • "MAGA" does not count for "Make America Great Again".

  • "Beautiful, big, wall" does not count for "beautiful wall".

  • “Booming economy” does not count for “boomer”.

  • “Radical islamic terrorism” and “radical Islamic terrorist” do not count for “radical Islamic terrorists”.

Does count:

  • "Blood bath" counts for "bloodbath".

  • "Horrible radical, left lunatic" counts for "radical left".

  • "America the beautiful. Wall..." counts for "beautiful wall" (I would be very surprised if this sort of edge case arose, but I plan to be literal about "words in sequence, ignoring punctuation).

  • "Billions and [CROSSTALK] billions" counts for "billions and billions", if it's clear Trump said those words in sequence (i.e. even if the transcript includes other sounds).

  • “L train” (if it somehow came up) would count for “L”.

Related: /Ziddletwix/first-debate-bidenisms-megamarket-w

Get Ṁ600 play money

🏅 Top traders

#NameTotal profit
1Ṁ14,214
2Ṁ3,862
3Ṁ2,974
4Ṁ2,346
5Ṁ959
Sort by:

@traders These resolutions can be controversial, so I added a list of examples to the description. I'd prefer to handle as many edge cases as possible in advance, so please read through them before betting, and ask if there are any scenarios that you think are still unclear.

The intention for this market was to be quite strict—some of the options refer to Trump's idiosyncratic speaking quirks, not the content of his speech (e.g. the more general phrase "rigging an election" vs Trump's oft repeated "rigged election"). From the original description, I think most of these cases are extremely simple.

One difficult case is pluralization—the original intent was absolutely for pluralization to matter (because how Trump pluralizes words is an intrinsic part of how he speaks). If most people feel that was unclear, and they bet assuming "terrorist" would count for "terrorists", I can relax that, but I'll want to explicitly add it to the description (and I'd personally prefer to keep it strict).

@traders More Trump-isms on the horizon. Check out fresh markets for (1) his VP introduction speech, & (2) his RNC nomination acceptance speech.

/Ziddletwix/trumpisms-megamarket-which-exact-wo

/Ziddletwix/trumpisms-megamarket-which-exact-wo

@traders The CNN transcript is up (plus the video to confirm). I resolved every YES that I could find. Currently, I plan to resolve all other remaining options NO, unless I hear otherwise. Please take a look, and LMK if I missed anything. A few of note:

  • The trickiest case is "drain the swamp”, which was bet up high, but I can only find a single “drained the swamp” in the transcript, which wouldn't count. In the audio (timestamp), it's obviously hard to be totally confident about the difference between "drained" and "drain", but "drained" makes much more sense in context, and I think that's what I hear, so I feel pretty sure the transcript is right. If there are disputes, I can ask a mod to rule.

  • There’s a “weaponization”, but that does not count for “Weaponize(d)”

  • Biden says “bloodbath”, but not Trump

Again, I currently plan to resolve all un-resolved options as NO, but I'll wait a bit so people can flag anything I might have missed.

My body is ready and it would be good to free up the mana for the end of the month!

@traders With no complaints raised, I resolved this rest NO. LMK if you think any are in error.

I'll definitely make a new version of this market for a second debate, but I'd rather wait until closer to when it happens, if it actually does (so mana isn't tied up, & I can run it properly).

“Obama”

@Ziddletwix "Losers", "Tremendous", and "Hunter" resolve YES.

sold Ṁ64 "Greatest economy in... YES

I’m probably going to wait to resolve until I get a transcript/video. Not able to watch most of this and I want to be careful to get it right (saw some people betting up things that were the wrong phrasing). Sorry for the delay!

If mods are very confident in a result and want to resolve things early rhey can, otherwise I’ll wait for transcript

bought Ṁ50 Answer #thx9tazg4e NO

I extremely strongly support waiting to resolve! It's good! Nobody's going to die if they get their internet money back a few hours or days later.

I will die if Trump says Biden is a sus NPC Skibidi with no rizz and it doesn't resolve immediately

@traders @ManifoldPolitics has generously bought out the liquidity in this market, and thus now it will be left open for LIVE TRADING (closing immediately after the debate). Have fun!

Please, bear in mind that the criteria here are strict. Just because you think you hear Trump say something that sounds a bit like one of these options, please do not bet it up to 99% unless you're super confident! I'll use the transcript/recording to confirm later what exactly is said.

Related market with many other words (which will also stay open for live trading)!

@Gen Does "baby boomer" referring to the generation count as "boomer?"

As per the description, this resolves solely based on the word used, not the context. (Although Gen Z’s “boomer” slang is explicitly short for “baby boomer” so in this case I don’t think that would matter anyways$.

@traders While Trump's idiosyncratic rhetorical patterns are more famous, Biden has some odd verbal quirks of his own, so I made a duplicate for Biden-isms. Lock in your bets now, only 4 days left:

/Ziddletwix/first-debate-bidenisms-megamarket-w

sold Ṁ189 Answer #fie8rain5s NO

I'd add some answers but man that Mana cost is high.

bought Ṁ35 "Greatest economy in... YES

if you have suggestions, you can post them here & see if someone is willing to pay to add it? (long shot, since people probably prefer to add their own ideas, but just in case someone likes the suggestion). you can also add your own to the @ManifoldPolitics prop bet market, where the submission cost is only 100M

To help set reasonable probabilities, I recommend checking out the 2020 debate transcripts:

Many of the phrases that currently have high probability in this market do not (from what I can tell) appear in either debate. That doesn't prove anything—n=2, and Trump in 2020 != Trump in 2024, but personally I would wager some of these probabilities are too high (and am betting NO).

You can also check out the transcripts for some recent rallies:

These better reflect what Trump currently cares about in 2024 (and they seem to contain more of his catchphrases), although I'd wager that Trump's speaking style will be a fair bit different between his rallies and a debate.

@traders These resolutions can be controversial, so I added a list of examples to the description. I'd prefer to handle as many edge cases as possible in advance, so please read through them before betting, and ask if there are any scenarios that you think are still unclear.

The intention for this market was to be quite strict—some of the options refer to Trump's idiosyncratic speaking quirks, not the content of his speech (e.g. the more general phrase "rigging an election" vs Trump's oft repeated "rigged election"). From the original description, I think most of these cases are extremely simple.

One difficult case is pluralization—the original intent was absolutely for pluralization to matter (because how Trump pluralizes words is an intrinsic part of how he speaks). If most people feel that was unclear, and they bet assuming "terrorist" would count for "terrorists", I can relax that, but I'll want to explicitly add it to the description (and I'd personally prefer to keep it strict).

"Make America Great Again"

[deleted..]

bought Ṁ200 Answer #9op77rllo1 NO

@EricBolton Is this meant to be "illegal migrants", or "illegal immigrants"? (I/you can edit it to be an OR if you'd like, but as it stands "illegal immigrants" wouldn't count)

i intended it as migrants, just pulling phrases from recent stump speeches

Perfect, sounds good to me, will leave it as is.

(Glancing at past debates & a couple of rallies, I'm guessing that "illegal migrants" and "illegal immigration" are a bit less likely to be said than "illegal immigrants", so that's why I'm currently betting NO on both, but he definitely varies in his phrasing so there's no way to be certain)

Comment hidden
Comment hidden

More related questions