It’s about time.

First, Trump has been hinting at this idea for a while. That’s no secret.

But after the U.S. recently executed a military operation in Venezuela to extract Venezuela’s leader, Trump essentially said we’re communicating to the world that we’re not afraid to reshape the Western Hemisphere.

Days later, Denmark and Greenland apparently requested a meeting with Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Look, when a NATO ally asks to sit down and talk after years of dismissing the idea, maybe we should pay attention.

In fact, according to a Wall Street Journal report, Rubio told lawmakers that the administration’s goal is to buy Greenland from Denmark, and that recent threats are meant to push Denmark into negotiations.

Let’s look at why it might work out this time.

First, this might not be about land.

But about how the U.S. sees its role in the world.

Mike Cernovich recently argued that America already acts like an empire — intervening abroad, reshaping countries, absorbing consequences — but refuses to acknowledge or structure that role responsibly.

His point is that the U.S. has taken on the costs of empire without the benefits, importing instability and debt instead of securing resources and strategic control.

If America is going to exercise power anyway, his argument is that it should do so deliberately, not halfway.

Besides, there’s precedent for Trump executing on territorial expansion.

We already have control of the Panama Canal again.

Historically, the United States didn’t grow slowly — New states were added at a clip during the 19th and early 20th centuries, culminating in Arizona becoming the 48th state in 1912.

After that, the process stalled, with Alaska and Hawaii not joining until 1959.

Why the lull? Topic for another day.
Point is, it’s now been 67 years since the last state was added and if not a “state”, then a territory or pieces of land might be the appropriate acquisition.

The market is at 42% ish, not 82%, for a reason.

Greenland's Prime Minister has stated emphatically, "We do not belong to anyone else. We decide our own future." 

Denmark has echoed this sentiment. Selling Greenland would be political suicide for any Danish government. (how much power do they have again?) 

NATO allies don't sell each other territory. 

Denmark is a founding member of NATO. Pressuring an ally into selling sovereign territory could fracture the alliance at a time when unity is critical.

And Trump has a history of big talk, limited follow-through. 

As one Kalshi trader put it, "At least half of his wacky proposals go nowhere."

Trump floated buying Greenland in 2019, and nothing happened. Why would this be different?

The question is whether this time is actually different — and that’s where investors, traders, and prediction markets have to be disciplined.

As Sir John Templeton warned, “The four most dangerous words in investing are: ‘This time it’s different.’”

Market prices as of January 6, 2026. Prediction markets are dynamic — check Kalshi for current pricing.

Taking a YES position at 40¢:
You’re expressing the view that Trump’s transactional diplomacy ultimately prevails. The strategic value of Greenland’s resources and location is too high to ignore, and the long timeline extending to 2029 provides ample runway for negotiations to materialize. A $1,000 position at 40¢ buys 2,500 YES contracts, for a potential payout of $2,500 if the market resolves YES.

Taking a NO position at 60¢:
You’re expressing the view that this remains political theater. Denmark and Greenland have both stated that “Greenland is not for sale,” and pushing a NATO ally this far is a bridge too far, even for Trump.

A $1,000 position at 60¢ buys approximately 1,667 NO contracts, for a potential payout of about $1,667 if the market resolves NO.

_{___________________________________________________________________}

_DISCLAIMER:

_{The Content is not intended to provide, and does not constitute, financial, investment, trading, tax, legal, or any other form of professional advice. It is not a recommendation, suggestion, solicitation, or offer to buy, sell, trade, or hold any securities, event contracts, derivatives, cryptocurrencies, or other financial instruments on platforms such as Polymarket, Kalshi, or any other prediction market.}

_{Prediction Market Edge believes the Content is reliable but makes no representations or warranties as to its accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or suitability for any purpose. The Content is subject to change without notice, and Prediction Market Edge assumes no duty or obligation to update it.}

_{Trading in prediction markets involves significant risk of loss, including the potential loss of your entire investment. Past performance (including any highlighted “wins” or gains) is not indicative of future results. Markets are volatile, influenced by news, liquidity, resolution rules, and other factors, and individual results will vary. Subscribers and readers should conduct their own independent research, consider their financial situation, risk tolerance, and objectives, and consult qualified professionals before making any trading or investment decisions.}

_{Prediction Market Edge is not responsible for any third-party information, market data, platform rules, or services referenced herein, including but not limited to Polymarket, Kalshi, or other exchanges. Use of the Content is at your own risk.}

_{By subscribing to or accessing this Newsletter or related materials, you agree that Prediction Market Edge and its affiliates shall not be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, consequential, or other damages arising from your use of the Content.}

_{For important additional information, please review our full Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, and any Subscription Agreement (available on predictionmarketedge.com).}