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

[Ishicryptic]

I can understand the discomfort about betting on military actions or government policy anmouncement, people with inside information can take advantage of this and cheat to make a lot of money. Not too long ago a military personnel bet on the capture of Maduro, though the personnel was identified and arrested. And betting on things like this can give the knowledge of sensitive action that's about to happen.

As for elections, i do not quite agree. There is no worry about inside information in this case, because nobody knows who would win the election before results are out, neither do i see how it would cause manipulation nor affect the actual results or will of the voters.

I very much agree with you that making predictions on sensitive matters in the military and classified government information is not good, it will amount to indirectly revealing sensitive secrets about a government which it's enemies can take advantage of. The military personnel who made prediction on Maduro's capture involuntarily revealed a top secret which if Maduro's then government suspected that the prediction was from an insider I'm sure that the operation would have foiled.

But prediction on presidential elections are no secret, the information of the contestants are all in the open and it is left for everybody to predict who they think will win. Any elections that the contestants are known can be predicted who will win and that is why we have polls on preferred candidates which is no different from prediction except that you bet your money in prediction sites.

[eisen33]

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.

https://www.reuters.com/world/most-americans-oppose-betting-elections-government-events-reutersipsos-poll-2026-10-12/

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.

I don’t think the main concern here is whether this could lead to market manipulation or not. Most likely, it wouldn’t, but I think the real issue is that a large part of society will always be opposed to gambling in any form, whether it’s traditional casinos or prediction markets. The majority of people in virtually any country will perceive these activities as a form of gambling, and as a result will naturally oppose them.

[Zlantann]

Expecting politicians to pass strict bans on prediction market trading for government insiders is just wishful thinking bro!
The US Congress has been stalling stock trading bans for years, every time a "ban" gets introduced, it either gets gutted or stuck in committee because half of Capitol Hill relies on non public info to line their own pockets. If they won't even stop themselves from trading equities, they aren't going to voluntarily cut off access to unregulated high leverage event contracts.

When politicians have early access to policy drafts and committee decisions, an anonymous order book on a prediction market is basically free money for them. The entire system is built on the conflicts of interest they pretend to fight, so expecting them to self regulate out of the goodness of their hearts is a complete joke.

Donald Trump Jr. has an interest in prediction market providers like Polymarket, Kalshi, and Truth Predict. So you wouldn't expect the US government to enact and enforce strict laws against prediction markets. Republicans hold the majority in Congress, which would slow the process of enacting such laws.

I expect the 120th United States Congress to investigate allegations of insider trading in the political circle of the current president. No top government official has been investigated for this crime. There have been arrests of Trump's teleprompter operator, Gabriel Perez, and Gannon Ken Van Dyke, a U.S. Army Special Forces Master Sergeant, for betting with inside information. We might start seeing the big fish in the insider world.

[bakasabo]

...

Of course, for me I will say that they should also make a law that would prohibites people who are Insiders to stop gambling just as they did it with footballers same thing can likely be implemented.

Expecting politicians to pass strict bans on prediction market trading for government insiders is just wishful thinking bro!
The US Congress has been stalling stock trading bans for years, every time a "ban" gets introduced, it either gets gutted or stuck in committee because half of Capitol Hill relies on non public info to line their own pockets. If they won't even stop themselves from trading equities, they aren't going to voluntarily cut off access to unregulated high leverage event contracts.

When politicians have early access to policy drafts and committee decisions, an anonymous order book on a prediction market is basically free money for them. The entire system is built on the conflicts of interest they pretend to fight, so expecting them to self regulate out of the goodness of their hearts is a complete joke.

Politicians that use insiders information is no doubt a bad thing, but do they create a huge harm? If 1 politician makes a bet against all market is betting on, and his bet is huge, he will 100% get noticed and investigation will be started. I dont he will be so foolish to expose himself like that. Politicians were always "power they were given" for own advantage. I have doubts that before prediction market became popular, they were not using insiders info. You are 100% correct by saying that entire system is built on conflicts of interest, but not only prediction market is built on that, but whole politics as-well. Without prediction market, politicians will keep on earning on "making right prediction/decision".

[Hispo]

Expecting politicians to pass strict bans on prediction market trading for government insiders is just wishful thinking bro!
The US Congress has been stalling stock trading bans for years, every time a "ban" gets introduced, it either gets gutted or stuck in committee because half of Capitol Hill relies on non public info to line their own pockets. If they won't even stop themselves from trading equities, they aren't going to voluntarily cut off access to unregulated high leverage event contracts.

When politicians have early access to policy drafts and committee decisions, an anonymous order book on a prediction market is basically free money for them. The entire system is built on the conflicts of interest they pretend to fight, so expecting them to self regulate out of the goodness of their hearts is a complete joke.

Donald Trump Jr. has an interest in prediction market providers like Polymarket, Kalshi, and Truth Predict. So you wouldn't expect the US government to enact and enforce strict laws against prediction markets. Republicans hold the majority in Congress, which would slow the process of enacting such laws.

I expect the 120th United States Congress to investigate allegations of insider trading in the political circle of the current president. No top government official has been investigated for this crime. There have been arrests of Trump's teleprompter operator, Gabriel Perez, and Gannon Ken Van Dyke, a U.S. Army Special Forces Master Sergeant, for betting with inside information. We might start seeing the big fish in the insider world.

Well, the Republican Party is not longer in control of the Congress and the Senate of the United States, so it is likely we see the democrat party pushing forward getting inside traders to be held into account and also attack people with conflict of interest within the ecosystem of prediction markets in the USA.
There have been some calls from within the party to investigate Trump for alledgelly benefitting from cryptocurrency companies and also from his own memecoin.

Let us see what comes next, these are going to be two long years for Trump, as he now has the congress and the Senate against him.

[Elainebue]

i can understand why most people oppose it. betting on elections feels different from betting on a regular sporting event

[henmark]

Expecting politicians to pass strict bans on prediction market trading for government insiders is just wishful thinking bro!
The US Congress has been stalling stock trading bans for years, every time a "ban" gets introduced, it either gets gutted or stuck in committee because half of Capitol Hill relies on non public info to line their own pockets. If they won't even stop themselves from trading equities, they aren't going to voluntarily cut off access to unregulated high leverage event contracts.

When politicians have early access to policy drafts and committee decisions, an anonymous order book on a prediction market is basically free money for them. The entire system is built on the conflicts of interest they pretend to fight, so expecting them to self regulate out of the goodness of their hearts is a complete joke.

Politicians that use insiders information is no doubt a bad thing, but do they create a huge harm? If 1 politician makes a bet against all market is betting on, and his bet is huge, he will 100% get noticed and investigation will be started. I dont he will be so foolish to expose himself like that. Politicians were always "power they were given" for own advantage. I have doubts that before prediction market became popular, they were not using insiders info. You are 100% correct by saying that entire system is built on conflicts of interest, but not only prediction market is built on that, but whole politics as-well. Without prediction market, politicians will keep on earning on "making right prediction/decision".

Politicians will definitely not be that foolish. At first, they will never expose themselves as they already have a number of pawns they can use. They will use multiple ratholes to make the bet which can make it look genuine but still at the end, all of the profit goes right in his pockets. I have seen a few of these politicians using almost 100% of their brain in thinking out a way to scam or get the money that is supposed to be used elsewhere. These politicians have really sharp minds when it comes to such scams.

They can always find out a way to benefit out of election betting and I think for that reason, so many people have voted against betting on elections. It looks fair to me, we already have way exciting games and sports so why involve elections?

[Africolo]

The concerns about national security and election integrity are overblown in my opinion. Even those that are against prediction markets are paying close attention to their predicted outcomes whenever there is an important election coming up. These markets offer valid forms of recreation and provide valuable information to the public. Obviously they should try to fight against any attempts at manipulation and anybody in a government position should not be allowed to use them.

Your opinion is very valid and simple, if this opportunity is given we all know what will be the outcome of the elections and it will lack it's credible because one can't gamble with the future of a country through mere stakes which has never been done anywhere in the world when it comes to electing leaders into political positions who will be in the affairs of the country and there will be high level of manipulation in the process.

So it's not ideal and it's not everyone that likes gambling as it is shown in the debate which many voted against the idea. Politics are not daft that they will welcome such idea because it will expose them and probably some of them will get scammed from the market. So those in political positions should be restricted from using it.

[SirLancelot]

I think 4506 is not a lot of people. This survey might have captured a very small market and skipped the majority who are actually active in gambling. For others, they might see a slight chance of election manipulation so they will always oppose anything like this without actually digging in further. Betting on election results will have no impact on the results. It's just a way for a few of us to have some fun while staking money to see if we can make our assumptions.

I will still support betting on these election results and I am sure there will thousands like me who missed to fill that survey. The target audience for surveys really matters the most because you can't expect the old youth support gambling/betting.

[Bitcoin_Budha]

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.

https://www.reuters.com/world/most-americans-oppose-betting-elections-government-events-reutersipsos-poll-2026-10-12/

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.

I don’t think the main concern here is whether this could lead to market manipulation or not. Most likely, it wouldn’t, but I think the real issue is that a large part of society will always be opposed to gambling in any form, whether it’s traditional casinos or prediction markets. The majority of people in virtually any country will perceive these activities as a form of gambling, and as a result will naturally oppose them.

That's actually true. Only a fraction of the population will actually be in favour of gambling while others will oppose gambling for no reason. They have this mentality that gambling is a bad addiction and can ruin anyone financially. The world has seen quite a lot of such examples so it is not their mistake but they misunderstand informed gambling with blowing money in a casino while drinking expensive champagne. For them, gambling is just a bad habit so why will they support such activity?

The number of non-gambles will always beat us so these surveys can't be fair to us. I would still prefer trusting a poll started here instead of these surveys where I do not know the participants.

[oll]

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

I think election betting is a special event for bettors. I see two aspects of the issue that make it very different from any sports betting. First, election bets are impossible to rig, unless some electronic betting machine is compromised, which is unlikely. Because I believe that deceiving an entire country in this way is so risky that if the truth were revealed, the people would revolt and send such a fraud and his commission straight to jail.
Elections in authoritarian countries are rigged anyway, but the US is very good at being transparent.

[Alex077]

...
Politicians will definitely not be that foolish. At first, they will never expose themselves as they already have a number of pawns they can use. They will use multiple ratholes to make the bet which can make it look genuine but still at the end, all of the profit goes right in his pockets. I have seen a few of these politicians using almost 100% of their brain in thinking out a way to scam or get the money that is supposed to be used elsewhere. These politicians have really sharp minds when it comes to such scams.
...

I agree that politicians who have access to insider information are unlikely to openly place large bets from their own accounts. If they want to, they can use middlemen or other ways to hide their involvement. So I wouldn't count on an unusually large bet necessarily attracting the attention of regulators and leading to someone getting caught. Besides, not all suspicious transactions can actually be proven to involve wrongdoing.
Besides, I would make a distinction between using insider information and actually interfering with elections. These are two completely different things. The mere existence of prediction markets doesn't mean they influence election results. There needs to be solid evidence of manipulation to make that claim.

I think the problem isn't so much betting on elections itself, but the possibility of abusing one's official position. If these markets are simply banned, politicians who want to make money illegally using confidential information will surely find other ways to do it. But effective oversight and real penalties for such violations could do a lot more good.

[greysonz]

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

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.

I see a huge danger in betting on elections: voters will vote not with their hearts but with their economic interests. Let me explain. Elections should be impartial, and everyone should vote based on their thoughts and motives. But if people bet based on economic interests, or, more simply, trying to advance their bets on a particular candidate, then it's not an election but a tug-of-war within the country. And all this is for the sake of betting. This is not serious.
Elections should be based on the fact that the candidates are worthy and bring fresh, interesting ideas to society. Therefore, I believe that betting and elections are incompatible.

[eisen33]

That's actually true. Only a fraction of the population will actually be in favour of gambling while others will oppose gambling for no reason. They have this mentality that gambling is a bad addiction and can ruin anyone financially. The world has seen quite a lot of such examples so it is not their mistake but they misunderstand informed gambling with blowing money in a casino while drinking expensive champagne. For them, gambling is just a bad habit so why will they support such activity?

The number of non-gambles will always beat us so these surveys can't be fair to us. I would still prefer trusting a poll started here instead of these surveys where I do not know the participants.

The results may be accurate, on the other hand I can understand why people are unhappy about betting on elections. Many people place their hopes for a better future in elections, hoping that new leaders will come to power and improve their lives. Prediction markets can distort their perception of the electoral process. There are also people who believe that these bets could create opportunities to manipulate elections. Overall, it's a complicated issue, but I'm sure most people would prefer betting on elections to be prohibited.

[Charles-Tim]

I see a huge danger in betting on elections: voters will vote not with their hearts but with their economic interests. Let me explain. Elections should be impartial, and everyone should vote based on their thoughts and motives. But if people bet based on economic interests, or, more simply, trying to advance their bets on a particular candidate, then it's not an election but a tug-of-war within the country. And all this is for the sake of betting. This is not serious.
Elections should be based on the fact that the candidates are worthy and bring fresh, interesting ideas to society. Therefore, I believe that betting and elections are incompatible.

Betting on a presidential candidate does not mean you will not vote for the candidate. Also some people only bet and not vote while some people vote and not bet. All will happened in a way that nothing is manipulated or the bet is not the cause of any manipulation. What people should against is manipulation and not betting on election. Bet or not bet, the outcome will still be the same.

I also do not understand what you are trying to communicate. Betting for the purpose of economic interest is a good thing so far you want the economy to be good.

[bakasabo]

Why really Americans are against betting on elections and government events? Is it only because they think betting can manipulate future decisions? Because they know that they wont make a correct prediction, because before political decision becomes public, politicians have already decided all between themselves and are already started to act in that "will be announced" decision? Or the reason is that they are fed up with politics and want to decrease its appearance in their life? (tired of reading and getting news, they just want to live peacefully).

[danadc]

Betting on a presidential candidate does not mean you will not vote for the candidate. Also some people only bet and not vote while some people vote and not bet. All will happened in a way that nothing is manipulated or the bet is not the cause of any manipulation. What people should against is manipulation and not betting on election. Bet or not bet, the outcome will still be the same.

I also do not understand what you are trying to communicate. Betting for the purpose of economic interest is a good thing so far you want the economy to be good.

This is true; when people vote for certain predictions, it doesn't mean that will be their actual vote. There's a possibility they'll vote for that person, but when more serious polls are conducted, they can be manipulated by a percentage that carries psychological weight and impacts people.The problem with polls is that they can be deceptive or they can make things more serious for some voters, causing demonstrations or general unrest. There are very politically sensitive people and fanatics; sometimes sensitivities are stirred.

[Hatchy]

Betting on a presidential candidate does not mean you will not vote for the candidate. Also some people only bet and not vote while some people vote and not bet. All will happened in a way that nothing is manipulated or the bet is not the cause of any manipulation. What people should against is manipulation and not betting on election. Bet or not bet, the outcome will still be the same.

I also do not understand what you are trying to communicate. Betting for the purpose of economic interest is a good thing so far you want the economy to be good.

I think his point is that betting could influence election results, and in a way, this might actually be true. One concern is that people might try to manipulate the outcome. Since these bets are available, some people may choose to vote for certain candidates simply because they have money riding on them. This could influence the election if people start voting for candidates they don't actually support just to make money from their bets.

I still understand your point, though. Election results can only be manipulated to a certain extent without actual election rigging. I don't really see the need to ban these bets, as I don't think they would cause much harm.

[Coyster]

i can understand why most people oppose it. betting on elections feels different from betting on a regular sporting event

That's how prediction markets operate. These platforms allow people to gamble on a lot of events, including, but not limited to elections, so it is normal, and for people who do not like that, they could stick to regular gambling sites. Betting on election results does not affect the outcome of the elections, and as long as it doesn't, i do not see anything wrong in allowing people bet on who would win an election.

[Hispo]

i can understand why most people oppose it. betting on elections feels different from betting on a regular sporting event

That's how prediction markets operate. These platforms allow people to gamble on a lot of events, including, but not limited to elections, so it is normal, and for people who do not like that, they could stick to regular gambling sites. Betting on election results does not affect the outcome of the elections, and as long as it doesn't, i do not see anything wrong in allowing people bet on who would win an election.

People who don't like political prediction markets oppose them because in their head elections are supposed to be an important event in which money is not to be involved in any way, shape or form.
As soon as someone talks about money and elections, they first thing which comes to their mind is corruption, even if there is no direct correlation between prediction markets and election results.

People just need to understand that integrity of elections does not have any link to prediction markets, it is kind of the opposite: people with privileged information on the election could mess with prediction markets and partake in inside trading, for their own personal profit.