Skip to main content
icon for 洛杉矶市长选举:法院裁决第1轮欺诈?

洛杉矶市长选举:法院裁决第1轮欺诈?

icon for 洛杉矶市长选举:法院裁决第1轮欺诈?

洛杉矶市长选举:法院裁决第1轮欺诈?

<1% 概率
Polymarket
最新

<1% 概率
Polymarket
最新
This market will resolve to “Yes” if any court in the United States issues a ruling that widespread fraud, fraudulent conduct, or illegal manipulation of votes occurred during the first round of the 2026 Los Angeles mayoral election by October 31, 2027, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No”. A ruling is defined as any written order, judgement, opinion, or decision, including per curiam opinions, summary orders and sua sponte rulings issued by a relevant court. Unwritten oral rulings, tentative rulings, settlements, orders to show cause, or other procedures which do not constitute a finalized ruling will not count. A qualifying ruling of fraud must find that widespread, intentional voter fraud or vote-manipulation occurred during the first round of the 2026 Los Angeles mayoral election. Procedural irregularities, administrative errors, or isolated rulings on individual cases of voter fraud will not count. The primary resolution source will be official information from the relevant court; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.Official actions and election administration data explain the strong trader consensus against a court ruling the June 2026 Los Angeles mayoral primary fraudulent. Los Angeles County officials and the registrar confirmed that every ballot update batch included votes for all candidates, including Spencer Pratt, after a widely circulated social media claim of zero votes for one contender was traced to a brief reporting lag and quickly debunked. Trump-appointed U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli reviewed county records and publicly stated the specific allegation was false while noting separate fraud investigations remain ongoing without evidence of outcome-altering irregularities. Vote tabulation proceeded under California's standard mail ballot rules, producing certified margins that advanced Karen Bass and Nithya Raman to the November runoff with no successful legal challenges filed seeking to invalidate the round. These verified procedural facts and absence of substantiated court filings keep the implied probability of a fraud ruling near 6.5%.

This market will resolve to “Yes” if any court in the United States issues a ruling that widespread fraud, fraudulent conduct, or illegal manipulation of votes occurred during the first round of the 2026 Los Angeles mayoral election by October 31, 2027, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No”.

A ruling is defined as any written order, judgement, opinion, or decision, including per curiam opinions, summary orders and sua sponte rulings issued by a relevant court. Unwritten oral rulings, tentative rulings, settlements, orders to show cause, or other procedures which do not constitute a finalized ruling will not count.

A qualifying ruling of fraud must find that widespread, intentional voter fraud or vote-manipulation occurred during the first round of the 2026 Los Angeles mayoral election. Procedural irregularities, administrative errors, or isolated rulings on individual cases of voter fraud will not count.

The primary resolution source will be official information from the relevant court; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
交易量
$805
市场开放时间
Jun 8, 2026, 5:35 PM ET
This market will resolve to “Yes” if any court in the United States issues a ruling that widespread fraud, fraudulent conduct, or illegal manipulation of votes occurred during the first round of the 2026 Los Angeles mayoral election by October 31, 2027, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No”. A ruling is defined as any written order, judgement, opinion, or decision, including per curiam opinions, summary orders and sua sponte rulings issued by a relevant court. Unwritten oral rulings, tentative rulings, settlements, orders to show cause, or other procedures which do not constitute a finalized ruling will not count. A qualifying ruling of fraud must find that widespread, intentional voter fraud or vote-manipulation occurred during the first round of the 2026 Los Angeles mayoral election. Procedural irregularities, administrative errors, or isolated rulings on individual cases of voter fraud will not count. The primary resolution source will be official information from the relevant court; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
This market will resolve to “Yes” if any court in the United States issues a ruling that widespread fraud, fraudulent conduct, or illegal manipulation of votes occurred during the first round of the 2026 Los Angeles mayoral election by October 31, 2027, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No”. A ruling is defined as any written order, judgement, opinion, or decision, including per curiam opinions, summary orders and sua sponte rulings issued by a relevant court. Unwritten oral rulings, tentative rulings, settlements, orders to show cause, or other procedures which do not constitute a finalized ruling will not count. A qualifying ruling of fraud must find that widespread, intentional voter fraud or vote-manipulation occurred during the first round of the 2026 Los Angeles mayoral election. Procedural irregularities, administrative errors, or isolated rulings on individual cases of voter fraud will not count. The primary resolution source will be official information from the relevant court; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.Official actions and election administration data explain the strong trader consensus against a court ruling the June 2026 Los Angeles mayoral primary fraudulent. Los Angeles County officials and the registrar confirmed that every ballot update batch included votes for all candidates, including Spencer Pratt, after a widely circulated social media claim of zero votes for one contender was traced to a brief reporting lag and quickly debunked. Trump-appointed U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli reviewed county records and publicly stated the specific allegation was false while noting separate fraud investigations remain ongoing without evidence of outcome-altering irregularities. Vote tabulation proceeded under California's standard mail ballot rules, producing certified margins that advanced Karen Bass and Nithya Raman to the November runoff with no successful legal challenges filed seeking to invalidate the round. These verified procedural facts and absence of substantiated court filings keep the implied probability of a fraud ruling near 6.5%.

This market will resolve to “Yes” if any court in the United States issues a ruling that widespread fraud, fraudulent conduct, or illegal manipulation of votes occurred during the first round of the 2026 Los Angeles mayoral election by October 31, 2027, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No”.

A ruling is defined as any written order, judgement, opinion, or decision, including per curiam opinions, summary orders and sua sponte rulings issued by a relevant court. Unwritten oral rulings, tentative rulings, settlements, orders to show cause, or other procedures which do not constitute a finalized ruling will not count.

A qualifying ruling of fraud must find that widespread, intentional voter fraud or vote-manipulation occurred during the first round of the 2026 Los Angeles mayoral election. Procedural irregularities, administrative errors, or isolated rulings on individual cases of voter fraud will not count.

The primary resolution source will be official information from the relevant court; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
交易量
$805
市场开放时间
Jun 8, 2026, 5:35 PM ET
This market will resolve to “Yes” if any court in the United States issues a ruling that widespread fraud, fraudulent conduct, or illegal manipulation of votes occurred during the first round of the 2026 Los Angeles mayoral election by October 31, 2027, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No”. A ruling is defined as any written order, judgement, opinion, or decision, including per curiam opinions, summary orders and sua sponte rulings issued by a relevant court. Unwritten oral rulings, tentative rulings, settlements, orders to show cause, or other procedures which do not constitute a finalized ruling will not count. A qualifying ruling of fraud must find that widespread, intentional voter fraud or vote-manipulation occurred during the first round of the 2026 Los Angeles mayoral election. Procedural irregularities, administrative errors, or isolated rulings on individual cases of voter fraud will not count. The primary resolution source will be official information from the relevant court; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.

警惕外部链接哦。

常见问题

"洛杉矶市长选举:法院裁决第1轮欺诈?"是 Polymarket 上一个拥有 2 个可能结果的预测市场,交易者根据自己的判断买卖份额。当前领先结果为"洛杉矶市长选举:法院裁定第一轮存在舞弊?",概率为 1%。价格反映社区的实时概率。例如,价格为 1¢ 的份额意味着市场集体认为该结果的概率为 1%。这些赔率会随着交易者的反应而不断变化。正确结果的份额在市场结算时可兑换为每份 $1。

"洛杉矶市长选举:法院裁决第1轮欺诈?"是 Polymarket 上新创建的市场,于Jun 8, 2026上线。作为一个新市场,这是你率先设定赔率并建立初始价格信号的机会。你也可以将本页加入书签,以便跟踪交易量和活动。

要在"洛杉矶市长选举:法院裁决第1轮欺诈?"上交易,浏览本页上列出的 2 个可用结果。每个结果显示一个代表市场隐含概率的当前价格。要建仓,选择你认为最可能的结果,选择"是"支持或"否"反对,输入金额并点击"交易"。如果你选择的结果在市场结算时正确,你的"是"份额每份支付 $1。如果不正确,支付 $0。你也可以在结算前随时卖出份额。

这是一个非常开放的市场。"洛杉矶市长选举:法院裁决第1轮欺诈?"的当前领先者是"洛杉矶市长选举:法院裁定第一轮存在舞弊?",仅有 1%。由于没有任何结果占据明显优势,交易者认为这高度不确定,可能带来独特的交易机会。这些赔率实时更新,请将本页加入书签。

"洛杉矶市长选举:法院裁决第1轮欺诈?"的结算规则明确定义了每个结果被宣布为获胜者所需满足的条件——包括用于确定结果的官方数据来源。你可以在本页评论上方的"规则"部分查看完整的结算标准。我们建议在交易前仔细阅读规则,因为它们规定了精确的条件、特殊情况和数据来源。