Election Betting Faces Public Resistance, Poll Finds

Majorities of Democrats and Republicans oppose using prediction markets to bet on U.S. election outcomes, according to an Ipsos poll of 4,506 U.S. adults. Respondents also opposed betting on military actions and government policy decisions.

The survey ran from Sept. 30 to Oct. 5. It measured approval of betting, not whether respondents trusted prediction-market forecasts or the reasons for their objections.

Prediction markets display prices that are commonly interpreted as probabilities. In a basic election contract, a winning position pays $1 and a losing position pays nothing. A trader who buys a candidate’s victory contract for 60 cents could make 40 cents if the candidate wins or lose the 60-cent investment if the candidate loses.

Prices change when traders buy and sell based on their expectations. Prediction-market operators argue that these transactions combine information from many participants and produce an updated forecast. Election markets have become a regular part of campaign coverage because viewers can follow a single number that changes during the race.

The markets also raise questions about who can trade and whether people who influence an election can profit from its outcome. A campaign employee who learns that a candidate will withdraw could trade before the news becomes public. If that employee could influence the timing of the announcement, the trade could involve both early access to information and influence over the event being traded.

Kalshi fined and suspended four congressional candidates for trading on their own races, according to the company. Such trades can create overlapping political and financial interests, even when there is no evidence that a trader used confidential information or tried to affect an election.

Kalshi’s rules prohibit relevant political insiders from trading. The company screens accounts and investigates suspicious activity. It also bans contracts involving war and death.

On Oct. 6, Kalshi introduced labels for markets with low trading volumes and made trade feeds more prominent. It added scores comparing market forecasts with actual outcomes. The company reported that most of its traffic comes from people who watch markets rather than trade.

A relatively small number of traders can set a price that a larger audience, including voters, journalists and businesses, can see. Companies can use contracts as financial protection when a government decision could affect their operations, provided the contract matches the risk.

Voters who only view the forecast receive no direct financial protection and do not decide which events become tradable contracts. The platform chooses which events to list, while traders determine the prices.

The poll separates views about forecasts from views about the betting system. Prediction-market operators face questions about forecast accuracy, participant conduct and which political outcomes should become commercial contracts.