The growing prediction market industry has attracted the attention of investors, media organizations and political observers, but a new poll shows many Americans still feel uncomfortable with allowing bets on elections and other political events.
Results from The POLITICO Poll, conducted with research firm Public First, show that most Americans understand prediction markets differentiate between betting on sports and betting on politics. While many respondents supported the legality of sports-related event contracts, few respondents were comfortable with markets tied to election results, presidential actions, or comments made by public figures.
The survey examined attitudes towards prediction markets such as those operated by Kalshi, Polymarket and other platforms that allow users to trade contracts based on future events. Researchers surveyed 2,035 US adults online in May, with key findings based on a subgroup of 1,667 respondents who demonstrated familiarity with the industry.
Election Market Faces Public Resistance
One of the clearest findings is the presence of political stakes. According to the poll, 44% of respondents said election result prediction markets should be illegalwhile only 30% support allowing this activity. Similar skepticism has emerged regarding markets based on statements made by public officials. Forty percent of respondents said trading in markets that President Donald Trump said might be prohibited, while 27% favored allowing such markets.
The concerns go beyond election forecasts. Respondents also expressed objections to contracts related to presidential pardons and other political developments. Markets involving war and terrorist acts face stronger oppositionwith the majority supporting a ban on that type of betting.
The findings come as political prediction markets continue to expand. Since a federal court ruling before the 2024 election paved the way for the regulation of election betting in the United States, activity on these platforms has increased substantially. Markets now cover topics ranging from presidential elections and congressional elections to Cabinet positions and legislative outcomes.
Proponents argue that these markets provide useful information by reflecting collective expectations about future events. Long-time prediction market trader Caleb Davies says this approach offers a different perspective than traditional polls and analysis. “This is not the same as getting a group of smart people to gamble money,” he said.
Others still aren’t sure. Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon criticized the election betting, telling POLITICO, “This is a bad bet for democracy.” He added, “If you allow election betting, you now have rich people who can bet millions of dollars and simultaneously influence the outcome of the election through dark money.… This type of corruption in our elections is deadly.”
Industrial Growth Meets Public Skepticism
The survey found limited participation in prediction markets despite their increasing visibility. Only 6% of respondents reported placing prediction market betswhile 53% said they would not consider doing so.
Interest is strongest among young adults. Among respondents aged 18 to 24, 12% said they had used prediction markets, and 30% indicated they would consider doing so. Similar participation rates were reported among those aged 25 to 34 years.
When asked whether the spread of prediction markets is beneficial to society, only 20% viewed the trend positively. Twenty-eight percent described it as neither positive nor negative, while 32% viewed it negatively. Another 24% said they didn’t know.
A look at the nature of prediction markets also reveals uncertainty. More than a third of respondents said the platform is primarily a gambling operation comparable to sportsbooks and casinos. Another 20% said prediction markets offer a gambling product but should receive different treatment from traditional betting businesses. Only a small percentage views it as a financial exchange and not a gambling platform.
Surveys repeatedly show large numbers of respondents voting "Don’t know” when asked about regulation, legality, and the role of prediction markets in society. Questions about industry oversight, gambling comparisons, and the legality of certain market categories all raise great uncertainty.
Regulation and Market Integrity Are Still Key Issues
Respondents also expressed concerns about how prediction markets should be regulated. Twenty-eight percent favored federal oversight, while 15% preferred regulation at the state level. Seventeen percent support self-regulation in the industry, and 8% say no regulation is needed.
A third of respondents said authorities should impose stricter limits on who can participate and what types of contracts should be offered. Nineteen percent think current restrictions are adequate, while 11% prefer fewer restrictions.
Questions regarding potential risks generated the strongest responses in the survey. The most frequently cited drawbacks are the possibility that the market could be manipulated, was chosen by 28% of respondents. The same percentage shows an increase in gambling addiction. Another 27% were worried about losing money they could not afford, while 21% highlighted concerns about insider trading.
These concerns received additional attention following a recent case in which the Department of Justice and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission charged a US soldier with suspected of using confidential information to trade in markets linked to the arrest of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro.
Despite the skepticism reflected in the poll, industry advocates argue that prediction markets still have huge room for growth. Bloomberg Intelligence analysts recently described politics and public policy contracts as follows "biggest opportunity” for platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket, estimates trading volume in the category could reach $266 billion by 2030.
