Most Americans oppose betting on elections, government events, Reuters/Ipsos pol

[lombok]

...So those opposing the idea are only concern about the aftermath effect of gambling when it comes to public and government issues, which is reasonable if am asked to.

Though, ideally betting and predictions on public affairs like elections and politics in a country should not have any effect on the direction the country will take, both the prediction markets and politics are supposed to be isolated from one another, so those with huge stakes of money in prediction markets don't have an actual day on political movements.

However, I recognize that is not the reality when it comes to the United States and Polymarket. Politicians can bet on themselves and there are always people with privileged information who will take advantage of it to get money.
If the state can guarantee there is separation between markets and those with privileged information, then there is no reason to forbid regular people from betting on elections or political policies...

The huge amount of money that goes into predicting winners in the elections is capable of turning healthy political system into extremely dangerous one for the manipulation of figures. Secrets from high places usually reach the ears of rich people who make profits even before the policies are publicly declared officially. While there is no definite separation between the state policy makers and the gamblers in the business, public involvement would definitely lead to losses. The trust of the public on the integrity of the democratic process is gradually being undermined by the selfish interests of the few individuals who manipulate the market sentiments for their own gains. It is therefore very important that strict protective measures are put in place.

[Hispo]

The huge amount of money that goes into predicting winners in the elections is capable of turning healthy political system into extremely dangerous one for the manipulation of figures. Secrets from high places usually reach the ears of rich people who make profits even before the policies are publicly declared officially.

That is why there should be restrictions and accountability, check and balances so those who take advantage of the system get punished, but that does not mean people will have to give uo on their rights to bet on whatever they want.

You and I are just normal citizens who don't have any privileged information on politics in our countries, why would we need to be restricted from accessing to betting markets? It does not make sense.

Also, trust in democracy goes far beyond prediction markets, even before Polymarket got popular in the United States, Trump was already claiming there was electoral fraud when he faced Biden for the presidency.

[Outhue]

Then it's obvious that the people knew about the manipulation of the government and that's why are against the prediction market in the country, they should bring up a vote if people still want prediction markets to exist or not, I already have an idea about what will happen from there on, when people don't want something that could benefit them it's always because some group of people are taking the most advantage and they are the ones losing money.

[Fortify]

The title of the topic in full: Most Americans oppose betting on elections, government events, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds

I do not know if this is initiated not to allow prediction market not to allow United States presidential election bet. 4506 people in the United States voted. The vote is not in favour of gamblers.

There are also gambling sites that are not predication markets that allow bets on United States presidential election.

Do you think that survey is accurate?

I do not think this kind of service is necessary. I do not see a way betting on United States presidential election can lead to manipulations.

It might be accurate but can also be framed or targeted at people who would be sensitive to gambling of any kind. These kind of bets have been going on for at least a couple decades if not more on regular gambling sites. It doesn't have any impact on the election itself and there have been plenty of upsets where the favorite lost. Some people just dislike gambling in general and will cast a vote against it in any format. Prediction markets are also getting bad publicity at the moment and this could be the overspill of that reaction. It would be interesting to see if there's any difference of opinions of the vote was also conducted outside of the US. For the land of the free it does seem rather oppressive in many ways these days.

[Oshosondy]

Then it's obvious that the people knew about the manipulation of the government and that's why are against the prediction market in the country, they should bring up a vote if people still want prediction markets to exist or not, I already have an idea about what will happen from there on, when people don't want something that could benefit them it's always because some group of people are taking the most advantage and they are the ones losing money.

But the poll was on 4506 people and not the entire population. Also this is a poll on something that has to do with election and not about prediction market totally. Did you see how people from United States bet on prediction markets during world cup? People are really gambling. I do not think that poll is fairly conducted. If the entire population get involved in a vote, more people will vote for prediction markets to be allowed.

[PVequalNRT]

The huge amount of money that goes into predicting winners in the elections is capable of turning healthy political system into extremely dangerous one for the manipulation of figures. Secrets from high places usually reach the ears of rich people who make profits even before the policies are publicly declared officially. While there is no definite separation between the state policy makers and the gamblers in the business, public involvement would definitely lead to losses. The trust of the public on the integrity of the democratic process is gradually being undermined by the selfish interests of the few individuals who manipulate the market sentiments for their own gains. It is therefore very important that strict protective measures are put in place.

If you look at the pattern of Polymarket and how events are predicted, you will know when an entity is making decision of the outcome. You will see a single account deposit millions and buy the shares of an event, people see this and rush to follow it and after sometime, the result goes to the side of people that first makes deposit. This alone has tempered with the reputation of the system, if you now include election into it, the result will be game over.

As far as election is concerned, there will be money around each party that are contesting, there will be people that want to push money to predict the outcome. It may not even be a favour of who is winning, people can do anything to make money.

[Hispo]

Then it's obvious that the people knew about the manipulation of the government and that's why are against the prediction market in the country, they should bring up a vote if people still want prediction markets to exist or not, I already have an idea about what will happen from there on, when people don't want something that could benefit them it's always because some group of people are taking the most advantage and they are the ones losing money.

In the case of the United States, it would take a whole state referendum in order to ban or keep prediction markets on political events available to citizens, as it stands today it is pretty much a grey area, hence there are so many lawsuits still active against Polymarket and against Kalshi in several States of the USA.

Still, I continue to keep my position, just because something is not widely popular among the people of a country it does not mean it is supposed to be outlawed, the USA is a country with hundreds of millions of people, and a percentage of them genuinely enjoy having access to prediction markets and bet on politics.

[el che]

You don't need to buy a whole election to mess with a prediction market, you just need enough capital to move the odds temporarily. Political campaigns are driven by momentum and media narratives. If a wealthy donor dumps $10 or 20 million onto an event contract to artificially inflate a candidate’s odds, major news outlets report that candidate as the "favorite". The market isn't reflecting reality, it's shaping it.

[Betwrong]

~

~I myself against with election and other government events betting, because it possess serious national threat on the country.

How so? How betting on election and other government events can possess a serious national threat? I think, betting is betting. It's fun in the first place. And when people have fun it's good for the country, not bad. Unless you live in North Korea, of course. There the more you suffer, the better for the country. Because everything is backwards there. Back to the topic. People who lose from betting shouldn't bet, but they can't forbid it for everyone else.

[bakasabo]

~

~I myself against with election and other government events betting, because it possess serious national threat on the country.

How so? How betting on election and other government events can possess a serious national threat? I think, betting is betting. It's fun in the first place. And when people have fun it's good for the country, not bad. Unless you live in North Korea, of course. There the more you suffer, the better for the country. Because everything is backwards there. Back to the topic. People who lose from betting shouldn't bet, but they can't forbid it for everyone else.

Is it possible that those who bet against election winner will get one day identified and their names would be put in a list of potential traitors ? Sounds like a crazy and unrealistic idea, but in small groups, if voting results become public and people find out who voted against who, some people change attitude to people who voted differently. As everyone now gather data and store data, is it possible that betting selection will be one day used against people? It is a statistic, that can be worked with.