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)
1,000
3.00
Can you say a bit more about what counts as "Trump going after someone" vs. his loyalists? I'm inclined to count the second - seems more in line with the spirit of the question?
E.g. Liz Cheney & Jan 6 Committee
https://www.yahoo.com/news/key-republican-calls-criminal-probe-192154967.html?guccounter=1
I voted here that he will go after "mainstream media".
I have a specific bet for that here:
@traders There's more free mana here - everything resolves NO rather than N/A if Trump loses the election.
This texting is coming through from the Trump to ME this morning. You all are thinking this is the joke? He is coming for us and I am afraid I am on the list. It may bring me to drink again in the Sober October. Is it the October surprise? No. It is the spooky season everyone is talking to me about!!!
If not elected, […] everything else [resolves] no immediately after election results.
This is rather counterintuitive, given the title already has 'if' in it, that would usually imply n/a in the event the condition isn't met
Would you rather edit the title to match the description or vice versa?
@TheAllMemeingEye Not sure what you're complaining about here. Just rolling with it, pretty self explanatory in the sense it's setting up a presidency where he goes after people/institutions more so than setting the conditions for resolution.
@Predictor I think it means everything here is way too high, probably because people didn't read the description carefully.
There are a lot of bad people out there. And you really have to go…If you have a problem, if you have a problem with someone, you have to go after them. And it’s not necessarily to teach that person a lesson. It’s to teach all of the people that are watching a lesson. That you don’t take crap. And if you take crap, you’re just not going to do well…But you can’t take a lot of nonsense from people, you have to go after them.