Prediction markets have attracted growing attention by allowing users to wager on outcomes ranging from sporting events to weather forecasts. Even with that expansion, a new survey indicates many Americans draw the line at contracts linked to politics, reflecting unease about betting on elections and government affairs.
Polling conducted by Public First for POLITICO found that 44% of US adults believe betting on election outcomes should be illegal, while 30% said it should be permitted. Respondents expressed similar views on markets involving presidential pardons or statements made by political figures.
Survey Shows Sharp Divide Between Sports and Politics
Public attitudes differed considerably depending on the type of event involved. Sports contracts received the strongest backing, with 53% saying they should be legal and 23% opposing them. Weather and award-show markets also earned relatively broad support, with almost half of respondents approving those products.
Political contracts generated much stronger resistance. Forty-three percent said markets tied to presidential pardons should be illegal, while 40% opposed wagers on comments made by the president or other public figures. Contracts involving war and terrorism faced the strongest rejection, with 57% opposing bets on wars and 64% rejecting markets involving terrorist acts.
The survey also found that prediction markets have yet to gain widespread appeal. More than half of respondents said they would not consider placing a wager through one of these platforms. Younger adults showed greater interest, with 12% of respondents aged 18 to 24, and the same proportion of those aged 25 to 34, saying they had already placed a prediction-market wager. Thirty percent of those aged 18 to 24 also said they would consider participating, compared with 17% of all respondents.
Industry Push Meets Political Scrutiny
Political prediction markets continue to expand despite public reservations. Nearly $700 million has already been traded on contracts tied to the 2028 US presidential election across Kalshi and Polymarket’s international platform. Bloomberg Intelligence analysts recently described politics, elections and public policy as the industry’s “greatest opportunity,” projecting those contracts could account for 27% of total trading volume by 2030, representing an estimated $266 billion annually.
Supporters argue these markets provide useful forecasting tools. Caleb Davies, a long-time prediction market trader from Minnesota, said, “it’s not the same as getting a whole bunch of smart people betting money.”
Critics remain concerned about the potential effect on elections. Sen. Jeff Merkley said, “It’s a bad bet for democracy.” He added, “If you allow election betting, you now have very affluent folks who can bet millions of dollars and simultaneously affect the outcome of an election through dark money. … That type of corruption in our elections is deadly.”
The debate comes as lawmakers increase their focus on prediction markets. More than 25 federal bills concerning the industry have been introduced this year, including proposals that would prohibit election contracts, sports-event markets or participation by elected officials and government insiders. Minnesota recently enacted the nation’s first statewide prediction market ban, while Tennessee created criminal penalties for insider trading and market manipulation involving prediction markets.
Source:
“Poll: Americans draw a new line in the betting bonanza sweeping over Wall Street — politics”, politico.com, Jun 22, 2026
The post Americans Split From Industry on Political Prediction Markets first appeared on RealMoneyAction.com.