Polymarket<:PepeSuit:1040246863145730119>
<:PepeSuit:1040246863145730119>
competetor参与话题 4消息总数 632
该用户的聊天记录定位。
聊天记录
共 632 条，显示第 151-200 条we ll see about starmer if its no contest yet they keep him till september with the media screaming for an entire month “Why is Starmer still PM if Burnham is the chosen successor?”
we ll see about starmer if its no contest yet they keep him till september with the media screaming for an entire month “Why is Starmer still PM if Burnham is the chosen successor?”
burnham obviously wants september rn for prep
burnham obviously wants september rn for prep
it doesnt matter what they say tbh
it doesnt matter what they say tbh
you are really underestimating the ridiculous dual power situation here
you are really underestimating the ridiculous dual power situation here
it doesnt work like that
it doesnt work like that
they usually want to avoid those type of things
they usually want to avoid those type of things
problem is that although burnham wants this, it would create a very very weird & uncertain dual power structure for like a month
problem is that although burnham wants this, it would create a very very weird & uncertain dual power structure for like a month
if there is a contest then at least late august
if there is a contest then at least late august
if no contest then yes
if no contest then yes
there is no way they would complete contest by august 7 bruh
there is no way they would complete contest by august 7 bruh
no chance
no chance
idk from a game theory perspective still looks like a clean no
idk from a game theory perspective still looks like a clean no
tbh PM transfer could still be deliberately delayed to select a government team, set policy priorities i.e all the the things burnham himself said.
tbh PM transfer could still be deliberately delayed to select a government team, set policy priorities i.e all the the things burnham himself said.
i dont think the starmer hatred goes to the point of sabotaging the successor from the get-go
i dont think the starmer hatred goes to the point of sabotaging the successor from the get-go
im honestly not sure
im honestly not sure
is that even desirable tho since burnham himself said that it would be better to take the reins in september after settling in
is that even desirable tho since burnham himself said that it would be better to take the reins in september after settling in
fuck yea i totally forgot about that
fuck yea i totally forgot about that
https://tenor.com/view/rhett-rhett-please-save-us-gif-6061935152868937703
https://tenor.com/view/rhett-rhett-please-save-us-gif-6061935152868937703
petro is in august, starmer is in september no?
petro is in august, starmer is in september no?
so what is the related reason here as to why starmer would go out earlier
so what is the related reason here as to why starmer would go out earlier
enrichment was solely about who had higher clarif leverage tbh
enrichment was solely about who had higher clarif leverage tbh
https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2026/06/iran-deal-nuclear-weapons-clarity-history?
https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2026/06/iran-deal-nuclear-weapons-clarity-history?
I am honestly very skeptical that the existing status quo means anything. This very equivalent vagueness before has literally led to the collapse of the 2003 agreement btw.
I am honestly very skeptical that the existing status quo means anything. This very equivalent vagueness before has literally led to the collapse of the 2003 agreement btw.
Tbh the status quo itself is incredibly vague. https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2026/06/iran-deal-nuclear-weapons-clarity-history?
Tbh the status quo itself is incredibly vague. https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2026/06/iran-deal-nuclear-weapons-clarity-history?
read reuters again
read reuters again
senior iranian official statement is enough of a qualifier to make this public
senior iranian official statement is enough of a qualifier to make this public
Does it say in the rules that the Iranian source needs to be non-anonymous? lol
Does it say in the rules that the Iranian source needs to be non-anonymous? lol
<@961050834743992330> can you rescind <@554492519262453781> 's timeout?
<@961050834743992330> can you rescind <@554492519262453781> 's timeout?
deleted
deleted
flightradar bro im crine
flightradar bro im crine
what? literally today
what? literally today
switzerland still confirming that the plan is to have meetings on the 19th
switzerland still confirming that the plan is to have meetings on the 19th
https://x.com/SwissMFA/status/2067589081702264852
https://x.com/SwissMFA/status/2067589081702264852
qatar was some mere preliminary meeting
qatar was some mere preliminary meeting
the entire point of this is to have direct meetings so hard to argue it would be anything but
the entire point of this is to have direct meetings so hard to argue it would be anything but
its not parallel or anyth
its not parallel or anyth
this is direct meeting
this is direct meeting
also jd doesnt need to go still will be a technical meeting it seems
also jd doesnt need to go still will be a technical meeting it seems
you cant track jds plane bro
you cant track jds plane bro
Iranian government plane going to zurich
Iranian government plane going to zurich
there is a real adjudication ambiguity
there is a real adjudication ambiguity
I personally dont think either are sufficient for 100c yes but sufficient enough for a much better probability than a coin flip.
I personally dont think either are sufficient for 100c yes but sufficient enough for a much better probability than a coin flip.
I would propose based on any reporting on an agreement for it.
I would propose based on any reporting on an agreement for it.
Taking NO on this is better EV since any contrarion news pumps NO side hard
Taking NO on this is better EV since any contrarion news pumps NO side hard
both would be enough
both would be enough
as reflected by price as well
as reflected by price as well
well the fair value on a report for 'freeze in nuclear activity' is far higher
well the fair value on a report for 'freeze in nuclear activity' is far higher
Any report on a freeze in nuclear activity being agreed on and this is 100c yes. You are focusing on the wrong thing.
Any report on a freeze in nuclear activity being agreed on and this is 100c yes. You are focusing on the wrong thing.
its Reuters, doesnt get more reliable than this.
its Reuters, doesnt get more reliable than this.