Survey shows Americans more open to sports prediction markets than political betting
A new poll reveals strong public resistance to election-related contracts, while sports and entertainment wagers receive majority support.
U.S.- A survey by Politico and Public First has highlighted a divide attitudes towards prediction markets in the US. While sports-related contracts are generally approved of, markets tied to elections and politics appear to face more opposition among the public.
According to the poll, 44 per cent of respondents believe betting on election outcomes should be illegal, compared with 30 per cent who support it being legal. Similar resistance was recorded for markets linked to presidential pardons and public statements.
By contrast, 53 per cent of respondents believed sports predictions contracts should be legal. Meanwhile, nearly half of people thought weather- and awards-related markets should be legal.
However, more than 50 per cent said they would not consider placing a bet via prediction market platforms. Younger respondents expressed greater interest, with 12 per cent of those aged 18 to 24 and 25 to 34 saying they had placed a bet, compared to just 6 per cent of the broader group. Some 30 per cent of 18- to 24-year-olds said they would consider betting, compared to 17 per cent overall.
When asked who should regulate prediction markets, 28 per cent of respondents pointed to the federal government, compared with 15 per cent who favoured state oversight.
Continued appeal of political betting
Despite the public opposition found in the survey, Politico reported that nearly US$700m has already been traded on 2028 presidential election contracts on Kalshi and Polymarket. The 2024 U.S. presidential election remains the most traded event to date, having generated more than US$3.6bn in volume.
Bloomberg Intelligence projects that politics and public policy contracts could represent 27 per cent of trading volume by 2030, up from 10 per cent in 2025, with annual volumes reaching US$266bn.
Regulators continue to argue that prediction market operators skirt gambling regulation, a claim rejected by operators and the CFTC.
