Donald Trump's Chances of Winning Nobel Peace Prize Skyrocket
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
The odds on President Trump winning the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize have improved dramatically since his administration negotiated a ceasefire in the Israel-Iran conflict that went into effect on Tuesday, according to a leading betting website.
Betting website Oddspedia gave Trump a 13.3 percent chance of securing the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize on May 19, but this had more than doubled to 27.8 percent as of 9:30 a.m. ET on Wednesday.
Why It Matters
On Friday, via his Truth Social website, President Trump complained that: "No, I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize no matter what I do, including Russia/Ukraine, and Israel/Iran, whatever those outcomes may be, but the people know, and that's all that matters to me."
In 2009, just eight months into his presidency, Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize in a move that the current president's son, Donald Trump Jr., described as "affirmative action" earlier this week.
What To Know
On Wednesday morning, Oddspedia gave Trump odds of a 27.8 percent chance of securing the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize, making him the favorite ahead of Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg on 20 percent.
This was a dramatic improvement in his performance with Oddspedia since May 19, when the website only gave Trump a 13.3 percent chance of winning the prestigious award.
In its most recent update, Thunberg was followed by Wikileaks founder Julian Assange with a 12.5 percent chance of winning the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize, then documentary maker David Attenborough on 10 percent, and the International Court of Justice with 7.7 percent.
President Donald Trump speaks during a news conference following the 2025 NATO Summit on June 25, 2025 in The Hague, Netherlands.
President Donald Trump speaks during a news conference following the 2025 NATO Summit on June 25, 2025 in The Hague, Netherlands.
Omar Havana/GETTY
On June 13, Israeli aircraft launched a series of strikes on nuclear facilities and military bases across Iran. Israeli authorities said the attacks were to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, though Tehran has long insisted its nuclear program is peaceful.
U.S. aircraft joined in on June 22 with precision strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan using bunker-busting bombs.
The following day, President Trump said a ceasefire had been agreed between Israel and Iran, which he initially said both countries had broken, describing them as "two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the f*** they're doing."
However, later on Tuesday, both Israel and Iran ceased their attacks, and Wednesday has been largely calm.
House Republican Buddy Carter said he was nominating Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize in response to the ceasefire agreement.
Earlier this week, Pakistan announced it had nominated Trump for the prize, crediting him with averting a major conflict with India in May. Ukrainian lawmaker Oleksandr Merezhko, head of Ukraine's parliamentary foreign committee, had also nominated Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize but has since withdrawn this, telling Newsweek he had "lost any sort of faith and belief" in the president's ability to end the Ukraine war.
What People Are Saying
Speaking to Newsweek, Oddspedia said: "Donald Trump's odds to win the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize have dramatically surged from +650 (13.3%) to +260 (27.8%), more than doubling his implied chances – despite recent controversies including a rescinded nomination, US airstrikes, and a televised F-bomb.
"Adding another layer of intrigue, he's now facing a familiar rival: climate icon Greta Thunberg enters the race as a strong runner-up, priced at +400 (20%)."
What Happens Next
The 2025 Nobel Prize announcement is due to take place on October 10 at the Norwegian Nobel Institute.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Court Lets Trump Block Billions of Dollars in Foreign Aid
(Bloomberg) -- The Trump administration can cut billions of dollars in foreign assistance funds approved by Congress for this year, a US appeals court ruled. Sunseeking Germans Face Swiss Backlash Over Alpine Holiday Congestion To Head Off Severe Storm Surges, Nova Scotia Invests in 'Living Shorelines' New York Warns of $34 Billion Budget Hole, Biggest Since 2009 Crisis Five Years After Black Lives Matter, Brussels' Colonial Statues Remain For Homeless Cyclists, Bikes Bring an Escape From the Streets In a 2-1 decision on Wednesday, the appellate panel reversed a Washington federal judge who found that US officials were violating the Constitution's separation of powers principles by failing to authorize the money to be paid in line with what the legislative branch directed. The ruling is a significant win for President Donald Trump's efforts to dissolve the US Agency for International Development and broadly withhold funding from programs that have fallen out of favor with his administration, regardless of how Congress exercised its authority over spending. Trump's critics have assailed what they've described as a far-reaching power grab by the executive branch. The nonprofits and business that sued could ask all of the active judges on the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit to reconsider the three-member panel's decision. If the panel's decision stands, it wasn't immediately clear how much it would affect other lawsuits contesting a range of Trump administration funding freezes and cuts besides foreign aid. Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson wrote in the majority opinion that the challengers lacked valid legal grounds to sue over the Trump administration's decision to withhold the funds, also known as impoundment. The US Comptroller General — who leads an accountability arm of Congress — could sue under a specific law related to impoundment decisions, Henderson wrote, but the challengers couldn't bring a 'freestanding' constitutional claim or claim violations of a different law related to agency actions. Henderson, appointed by former President George H.W. Bush, was joined by Judge Greg Katsas, a Trump appointee. The court didn't reach the core question of whether the administration's unilateral decision to refuse to spend money appropriated by Congress is constitutional. Judge Florence Pan, nominated by former President Joe Biden, dissented, writing that her colleagues had turned 'a blind eye to the 'serious implications' of this case for the rule of law and the very structure of our government.' White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement that the appeals court 'has affirmed what we already knew – President Trump has the executive authority to execute his own foreign policy, which includes ensuring that all foreign assistance aligns with the America First agenda.' A lead attorney for the grant recipients did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The two consolidated cases before the appeals court only deal with money that Congress approved for the 2024 fiscal year, which ends on Sept. 30. Grantees are poised to lose access to funds if they haven't yet been approved to be spent by federal officials — a precursor to actual payouts — or unless a court order is in place. The administration lost one of its few battles before the US Supreme Court earlier this year in the foreign aid fight. In March, a majority of justices refused to immediately stop US District Judge Amir Ali's injunction taking effect while the legal fight went forward. Since then, however, the challengers have filed complaints with Ali that the administration is failing to obligate or pay out the funds. They've rebuffed the government's position that the delay is part of a legitimate effort to 'evaluate the appropriate next steps' and accused officials of angling to use a novel tactic to go around Congress in order to cut appropriated money. The Trump administration has dramatically scaled back the US government's humanitarian work overseas, slashing spending and personnel and merging the USAID into the State Department. The challengers say the foreign aid freeze has created a global crisis, and that the money is critical for malaria prevention, to address child malnutrition and provide postnatal care for newborns. The groups argued that the president and agency leaders couldn't defy Congress' spending mandates and didn't have discretion to decide that only some, let alone none, of the money appropriated by lawmakers should be paid. The president can ask Congress to withdraw appropriations but can't do it on his own, the challengers argued. The Justice Department argued Ali's order was an 'improper judicial intrusion into matters left to the political branches' and that the judge wrongly interfered in the 'particularly sensitive area of foreign relations.' The government also said that the Impoundment Control Act, which restricts the president from overruling Congress' spending decisions, wasn't a law that the nonprofits and business could sue to enforce. The challengers countered that Ali's order blocking the funding freeze was rooted in their constitutional separation-of-powers claim, not the impoundment law. The cases are Global Health Council v. Trump, 25-5097, and AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition v. US Department of State, 25-5098, US Court of Appeals, DC Circuit. (Updated with White House comment.) Bessent on Tariffs, Deficits and Embracing Trump's Economic Plan Why It's Actually a Good Time to Buy a House, According to a Zillow Economist Dubai's Housing Boom Is Stoking Fears of Another Crash The Social Media Trend Machine Is Spitting Out Weirder and Weirder Results Americans Are Getting Priced Out of Homeownership at Record Rates ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gavin Newsom Just Announced California Is Drawing New Electoral Maps In The Most Hilarious Way
Gavin Newsom has announced that California will draw new electoral maps. On Monday, he sent a letter to Donald Trump, essentially warning that unless Texas backed down, he'd be forced to redraw California's maps: "If you will not stand down, I will be forced to lead an effort to redraw the maps in California to offset the rigging of maps in red states. But if the other states call off their redistricting efforts, we will happily do the same. And American democracy will be better for it." GovPressOffice/Twitter: @GovPressOffice Related: He also started tweeting EXACTLY like him. It started with a 24-hour warning. Related: "DONALD TRUMP HAS 24 HOURS LEFT TO RESPOND TO GOVERNOR NEWSOM'S LETTER. IF HE DOES NOT STAND DOWN, THERE WILL BE A VERY IMPORTANT PRESS CONFERENCE THIS WEEK WITH A MAJOR ANNOUNCEMENT! THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER." He followed that up the next day with another warning: "DONALD TRUMP, THE LOWEST POLLING PRESIDENT IN RECENT HISTORY, THIS IS YOUR SECOND-TO-LAST WARNING!!! (THE NEXT ONE IS THE LAST ONE!). STAND DOWN NOW OR CALIFORNIA WILL COUNTER-STRIKE (LEGALLY!) TO DESTROY YOUR ILLEGAL CROOKED MAPS IN RED STATES. PRESS CONFERENCE COMING — HOSTED BY AMERICA'S FAVORITE GOVERNOR, GAVIN NEWSOM. FINAL WARNING NEXT. YOU WON'T LIKE IT!!! THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER." Related: That evening, he issued his final warning: "FINAL WARNING DONALD TRUMP — MAYBE THE MOST IMPORTANT WARNING IN HISTORY! STOP CHEATING OR CALIFORNIA WILL REDRAW THE MAPS. AND GUESS WHO WILL ANNOUNCE IT THIS WEEK? GAVIN NEWSOM (MANY SAY THE MOST LOVED & HANDSOME GOVERNOR) AND A VERY POWERFUL TEAM. DON'T MAKE US DO IT!!! THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER." And boom, just like that, after that 24-hour deadline, he tweeted: "DONALD 'TACO' TRUMP, AS MANY CALL HIM, 'MISSED' THE DEADLINE!!! CALIFORNIA WILL NOW DRAW NEW, MORE 'BEAUTIFUL MAPS,' THEY WILL BE HISTORIC AS THEY WILL END THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY (DEMS TAKE BACK THE HOUSE!). BIG PRESS CONFERENCE THIS WEEK WITH POWERFUL DEMS AND GAVIN NEWSOM — YOUR FAVORITE GOVERNOR — THAT WILL BE DEVASTATING FOR 'MAGA.' THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER! — GN" Related: From the "MORE BEAUTIFUL MAPS" line to the multiple exclamation points to the classic THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER!" I'm sorry, but he nailed it. As this person said, "If you can't beat em, join em (in their style of writing.)" Also in Internet Finds: Also in Internet Finds: Also in Internet Finds:
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Appeals court lets the White House suspend or end billions in foreign aid
WASHINGTON (AP) — A divided panel of appeals court judges ruled Wednesday that the Trump administration can suspend or terminate billions of dollars of congressionally appropriated funding for foreign aid. Two of three judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit concluded that grant recipients challenging the freeze did not meet the requirements for a preliminary injunction restoring the flow of money. In January, on the first day of his second term in the White House, Republican President Donald Trump issued an executive order directing the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development to freeze spending on foreign aid. After groups of grant recipients sued to challenge that order, U.S. District Judge Amir Ali ordered the administration to release the full amount of foreign assistance that Congress had appropriated for the 2024 budget year. The appeal court's majority partially vacated Ali's order. Judges Karen LeCraft Henderson and Gregory Katsas concluded that the plaintiffs did not have a valid legal basis for the court to hear their claims. The ruling was not on the merits of whether the government unconstitutionally infringed on Congress' spending powers. 'The parties also dispute the scope of the district court's remedy but we need not resolve it ... because the grantees have failed to satisfy the requirements for a preliminary injunction in any event,' Henderson wrote. Judge Florence Pan, who dissented, said the Supreme Court has held 'in no uncertain terms' that the president does not have the authority to disobey laws for policy reasons. 'Yet that is what the majority enables today,' Pan wrote. 'The majority opinion thus misconstrues the separation-of-powers claim brought by the grantees, misapplies precedent, and allows Executive Branch officials to evade judicial review of constitutionally impermissible actions.' The money at issue includes nearly $4 billion for USAID to spend on global health programs and more than $6 billion for HIV and AIDS programs. Trump has portrayed the foreign aid as wasteful spending that does not align with his foreign policy goals. Henderson was nominated to the court by Republican President George H.W. Bush. Katsas was nominated by Trump. Pan was nominated by Democratic President Joe Biden.
