Midterm Election Betting Tops $220M — Double the Entire 2024 Cycle — as Public Opposition Mounts
Traders have wagered more than $220 million on the 2026 US congressional midterms across Kalshi and Polymarket, more than double the $92 million bet across the entire 2024 cycle, according to a Reuters analysis of Anti-Corruption Data Collective data published October 14. The 2026 cycle has more than 21,000 individual markets, up from 463 in 2024. Volume is concentrated in a few races, led by the Texas Senate contest. The growth comes despite a Reuters/Ipsos poll finding most Americans oppose using prediction markets to bet on elections.
Traders have wagered more than $220 million on the 2026 US congressional midterm elections across Kalshi and Polymarket — more than double the $92 million bet across the entire 2024 congressional cycle — according to a Reuters analysis of Anti-Corruption Data Collective data published October 14, 2026. The scale shows in the market count: the ACDC examined more than 21,000 individual markets covering the 2026 midterms through September 30, against just 463 for the 2024 cycle. The platforms have created contracts for essentially every dimension of the elections, from party control of each chamber to individual races and more granular outcomes. The $220 million is a conservative count focused on congressional races; a broader CNN analysis including all election-related markets put combined 2026 election volume above $750 million.
For UK readers, the US context differs sharply from the British one, where political betting is legal, long-established, and regulated by the Gambling Commission — UK bookmakers have taken election bets for decades without the controversy now surrounding US prediction markets. The US unease is partly cultural (election betting was effectively prohibited for most of the past century) and partly structural (these are CFTC-regulated financial contracts, not Gambling Commission-licensed bets, so the consumer protections differ). The volume is heavily concentrated: most of the $220 million is tied to a few high-profile races, led by the Texas Senate contest, with significant activity on the Maine, Michigan, and South Carolina Senate races. Trading clusters in the most competitive, nationally salient races, while hundreds of down-ballot contests attract little volume — which means the markets forecast the marquee races well and the thinly-traded ones poorly.
Commercial success is running ahead of public acceptance. A Reuters/Ipsos poll found most Americans oppose using prediction markets to wager on elections, reflecting persistent unease about commodifying the democratic process. Election officials have warned through 2026 that market odds could amplify disinformation — when prices diverge from polling, candidates cite the gap as evidence of fraud or hidden momentum — and that the markets create insider-trading risks when campaign staff, pollsters, or officials with non-public information can trade on it. Kalshi blocks election trades by politicians and campaign workers, and both platforms maintain the insider-trading controls required by federal law, but enforcement is imperfect, as the three-year suspension of North Carolina congressional candidate Laurie Buckhout for trading on her own race showed.
The midterm markets are the highest-stakes test yet of prediction markets as both a forecasting tool and a political-integrity concern. The November 3 elections arrive with more than $220 million wagered, over 21,000 markets live, and the sector under intense legal and political scrutiny — the SCOTUS cert petitions, the CFTC's swap rule, the state enforcement actions, and the reporting on political entanglements all unresolved. If the markets prove accurate on November 3, the platforms will cite it as evidence of their forecasting value; if they miss badly on a high-profile race, as happened in the Wisconsin gubernatorial primary earlier in 2026, critics will cite it as evidence the markets are gambling dressed up as forecasting. Either way, the midterms are where the 'first prediction-market election' framing is tested against actual results, shaping both public perception and the regulatory trajectory into the 2028 presidential cycle.
Operators mentioned in this article
Recent updates
Crypto.com and Novig Sue Missouri as Market Leaders Hold Back — Eighth Circuit Now in Play via Iowa
Crypto.com and Novig filed federal lawsuits on October 16 challenging Missouri's cease-and-desist orders, arguing their sports event contracts fall under exclusive CFTC jurisdiction. The suits came as Missouri's 30-day compliance window closed. Notably, the market leaders — Kalshi, Polymarket, Robinhood, and Underdog — have not sued; Missouri said it is in 'ongoing discussions' with Kalshi. The outcome is tied to the Eighth Circuit, now weighing the same question in Kalshi's Iowa appeal — the fourth federal circuit to take up the prediction market question.
Ohio Escalates Post-Sixth Circuit — Cease-and-Desist to 10 Operators, but Platforms Keep Operating
Emboldened by its Sixth Circuit win, Ohio escalated enforcement. Governor Mike DeWine and the Ohio Casino Control Commission issued cease-and-desist letters dated October 2 to 10 operators, including Polymarket and Robinhood, with an October 16 deadline and penalties up to the value gained from contracts. Kalshi was excluded because a court order already covers it. As of October 20, platforms were still operating in Ohio despite the deadline. Polymarket has sued the Commission and AG Andy Wilson; Wilson is expected to sue non-compliant operators.
Taiwan and Norway Move Against Kalshi — International Blocks Spread on Two Different Legal Theories
International enforcement against prediction markets accelerated in mid-October. A New Taipei District Court ordered Taiwan to block Kalshi and Coinbase on October 15 under Taiwan's election law, which prohibits profit-driven gambling tied to election results, roughly six weeks before Taiwan's November 28 local elections. Separately, Norway's regulator Lotteritilsynet proposed DNS-blocking 62 unlicensed sites including Kalshi and Polymarket, with operators given until October 15 to respond. The two actions rest on different legal theories — election-integrity law in Taiwan, gambling-licensing law in Norway.