Americans Oppose Political Prediction Markets Despite Industry Growth Push, Poll Finds

Americans are significantly more comfortable with sports-related prediction markets than those tied to elections and politics, according to a new POLITICO/Public First survey.

The poll, conducted by U.K polling firm Public First, found that 44% of respondents believe betting on election outcomes should be illegal, compared with 30% who said it should be legal. A similar share of respondents opposed markets on presidential pardons and comments by public figures.

The findings arrive as prediction market operators continue to expand their political offerings. Analysts have increasingly pointed to elections and public policy contracts as major future growth opportunities for the emerging sector.

Election Betting Faces Strongest Political Opposition

Sports event contracts received the strongest support. About 53% of respondents say these contracts should be legal, with 23% saying they should be illegal.

Weather- and award show-related contracts also received relatively strong support. Almost half (46%) of Americans say weather-related contracts should be legal, with 24% saying otherwise. Award show contracts receive nearly identical responses.

However, public opinion shifts sharply when politics enters the equation.

Markets tied to presidential pardons drew responses similar to those to election outcomes: 43% said they should be illegal, and 25% said they should be legal. Forty percent also opposed betting on comments the president or news outlets may make, compared with 27% who supported such markets.

War- and terrorism-related contracts generated the strongest overall resistance. Fifty-seven percent said betting on the outcome of wars should be illegal, while 64% opposed markets involving acts of terrorism.

Americans remain divided overall about prediction markets, according to the survey. About 29% said the growing popularity of prediction markets is a negative thing, compared to 19% who viewed it positively. Another 28% said it was neither positive nor negative, while 24% were unsure.

More than half of respondents said they would not consider placing a wager in a prediction market.

Political Markets Seen as Major Growth Opportunity

According to POLITICO, nearly $700 million has already traded on 2028 presidential election markets across Kalshi and Polymarket’s international platform. The 2024 U.S. presidential election was the most traded prediction market event to date, generating more than $3.6bn in volume on Polymarket’s international platform.

While sports currently account for the majority of trading, political markets are increasingly viewed as one of the industry’s largest growth opportunities.

Bloomberg Intelligence analysts recently described politics, elections, and public policy contracts as the industry’s “greatest opportunity.” Analysts estimated that such markets could account for 27% of trading volume by 2030, up from roughly 10% in early 2025.

The analysts projected political and public policy markets could generate approximately $266 billion in annual trading volume by 2030.

Public Skepticism Mirrors Legislative Concerns

The survey arrives amid growing legislative scrutiny of prediction markets at both the federal and state levels.

At the federal level, there are over 25 prediction market-related bills introduced this year. Several proposals would prohibit election-related contracts, sports-event contracts, or participation by elected officials and government insiders.

Among the measures introduced this year, the Prediction Markets Are Gambling Act would prohibit contracts for sports and election events. At the same time, the Stop Trading on Predictions and Corrupt Bets Act would ban contracts tied to elections, government actions, military conflicts, and sporting events.

Other proposals would prohibit members of Congress, senior government officials, judges, and campaign insiders from participating in prediction markets.

State lawmakers have also begun taking action.

Earlier this year, Minnesota enacted the nation’s first prediction market ban, prohibiting a wide range of event contracts tied to sports, elections, weather, award shows, and other outcomes. The CFTC, Kalshi, and Polymarket subsequently filed suits challenging the law.

Tennessee adopted a different approach. The state enacted legislation that creates criminal penalties for insider trading and market manipulation involving prediction markets.

The bills, at both the federal and state levels, have largely been driven by concerns about election integrity, insider trading, market manipulation, and the expansion of wagering into areas traditionally viewed as outside gambling regulation.

The POLITICO survey suggests many of those concerns may resonate with the public. While sports-related contracts received majority support, political markets faced significantly greater opposition, with more respondents saying election betting should be illegal than legal.