Most Americans oppose betting on elections and military strikes
Opposition crosses party lines even as betting platforms grow rapidly.
Reuters World News · Trump's energy ceasefire, new Riyadh strike and prediction marketsA bipartisan majority of Americans oppose letting people bet money on voting results, military strikes, and other acts of government.
That is the finding of a new Reuters/Ipsos poll on prediction markets, websites and apps that let users wager on future events. The opposition crossed party lines, even as betting platforms such as Polymarket and Kalshi are expanding quickly and advertising in Times Square, on social media, and on television.
The companies argue their platforms are useful financial tools, for gauging likely outcomes, letting businesses protect against losses, and polling the public. But most people surveyed saw them differently, as gambling.
Reporter Chris Prentice, who covers the findings, said people he interviewed, both Democrats and Republicans, worried about insider trading by government officials and others with private information, such as journalists. Many also objected to the basic idea of turning real life events into something to be bought and sold.
Questions people ask
What exactly is a prediction market?
It is a platform where people buy and sell contracts tied to the outcome of a future event, such as who wins an election or whether interest rates rise. The price moves with demand, so a contract priced at 60 cents can be read as a 60 percent chance. Winnings are paid if the prediction proves correct.
Are these election bets legal in the United States?
The legal status has been contested and has shifted in recent years. Kalshi won a key court fight in 2024 that allowed it to offer election contracts, which opened the door to wider growth. State gambling regulators continue to challenge some platforms, so rules vary by place and product.
Why do supporters say prediction markets are useful?
Supporters argue they gather the views of many people with money at stake, which can make forecasts more accurate than a single poll. Businesses and investors can also use them to hedge, or protect against losses, tied to political or economic outcomes. Critics respond that the risk of manipulation and insider trading outweighs those benefits.