Share 
Most Americans oppose using prediction markets to bet on election results, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll reported Oct. 12. The survey found 60% opposed the activity, compared with 13% who supported it and 24% who were unsure.
The findings come as New Jersey seeks to apply its gambling laws to sports contracts offered by Kalshi. A court order has kept those contracts available in the state while the legal dispute continues.
Ipsos surveyed 4,506 US adults online between Sept. 30 and Oct. 5. Prediction markets allow customers to trade contracts tied to outcomes such as elections, sporting events, and government decisions.
New Jersey seeks Supreme Court review of sports contracts
New Jersey’s dispute with Kalshi concerns sports contracts, rather than the election markets addressed in the poll. The state’s Division of Gaming Enforcement ordered the exchange to stop offering sports contracts in March 2025, calling them unauthorized sports wagering.
Kalshi argues that contracts traded on its federally registered exchange fall under the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s exclusive authority. New Jersey maintains that federal oversight does not exempt the exchange from state gambling laws.
Licensed New Jersey sportsbooks require customers to be at least 21 and cannot accept bets on college events played in the state or involving a New Jersey college team.
In April, the Third Circuit upheld a preliminary injunction blocking New Jersey’s enforcement against Kalshi. The underlying lawsuit remains unresolved.
New Jersey filed its Supreme Court petition Sept. 2. The National Council of Legislators from Gaming States backed the state’s request for review, arguing that states should retain authority over sports gambling.
Kalshi’s response to the petition is due Nov. 9, according to the court docket. The justices have not yet agreed to hear the case.
Opposition crosses party lines but varies by market
Election betting drew opposition from 69% of Democrats and 61% of Republicans.
Just 8% rejected the description of prediction market wagering as gambling, compared with 75% who agreed with it. Agreement stood at 81% among Republicans and 79% among Democrats.
Respondents were even less receptive to markets involving government actions. Betting on US military actions drew opposition from 65%, while 63% opposed wagering on government policy announcements or decisions. Support for those categories was 8% and 9%, respectively.
Professional sports contracts received more support, at 29%, although 43% opposed them. The question addressed sports wagering through prediction markets specifically, rather than attitudes toward sports betting overall.
Republican support for stricter prediction market regulation stood at 39%, compared with 57% among Democrats. Across all respondents, 45% favored stronger rules, 9% opposed them, and 42% took neither position.
Political betting by government officials faces stronger objections
Political wagering by government officials drew disapproval from nearly nine in 10 adults. The survey recorded an 88% inappropriate rating for both congressional members and their staff and, separately, the president and administration members.
On congressional participation, 89% of Republicans and 93% of Democrats considered the activity inappropriate.
According to Reuters, policymakers worry that political markets could give an advantage to traders with access to nonpublic government information. Kalshi and Polymarket say their safeguards include trading restrictions and monitoring for misconduct, with suspicious accounts referred to authorities.
Kalshi says it does not offer markets on military operations and bans candidates from trading on the outcome of their own races.
