American electoral betting sites allow you to bet on the candidate who would have the most chance of winning the presidential election, but this growing phenomenon raises ethical questions and the fears of certain experts.
Since the start of this American electoral campaign rich in twists and turns, electoral betting platforms have offered their users the opportunity to bet, particularly through cryptocurrency, on a range of political projections.
From the words used by candidates in the presidential debates to the choice of running mates, including a simple handshake between Trump and Harris, the slightest improbability becomes an excuse to bet on these platforms where billions of dollars are exchanged. Participation in these betting sites remains in principle illegal for American citizens, but several operate from abroad.
However, on October 2, a US federal appeals court gave the green light to an online election betting platform sued by a government agency which cited a risk for democracy.
The site in question allows Americans to bet on the candidate who, Kamala Harris or Donald Trump, they believe has the best chance of winning the presidential election on November 5, but also on the one who will be elected in the pivotal states and on the party that will obtain the majority in the Senate and the House of Representatives.
The phenomenon was even displayed on Times Squarein New York, where the bets of users of the prediction market newly authorized by the federal court scrolled in real time on a giant screen. He also predicted a clear victory for the Republican camp, but the site’s predictions were radically tightened a few days before the election.
Open in full screen mode
On social networks, prediction sites promote their platform by broadcasting images of their advertising panels.
Photo : X@Kalshi
Growing popularity
These sites seem to be extremely popular, especially with the recent elections
notes Sylvia Kairouz, professor in the department of sociology and anthropology at Concordia University and holder of the Research Chair in the Study of Games.
Open in full screen mode
Sylvia Kairouz, professor in the department of sociology and anthropology at Concordia University and holder of the Research Chair in the Study of Games.
Photo : -
According to Ms. Kairouz, these platforms initially claimed to offer a new way to take the pulse of voters.
However, the deregulation of the betting industry and the polarized political climate that reigns in the United States constitute fertile ground for these platforms, which are now seeking to take advantage of this situation.
Open in full screen mode
“Prediction markets”, like the one legalized by the American authorities in October, offer users the opportunity to bet on the electoral race.
Photo: Screenshot, Kalshi.com
If there was consensus, there would be no bet. There are more and more debates, divisions: it is a fertile ground to get people to make bets
supports Professor Kairouz.
Ultimately, voting is a right. Democratic societies are based on these principles of voting and democracy, where each person expresses themselves. We take this opportunity to make it an object of bet.
Unlike traditional betting sites, whether electoral or sports, these platforms imitate the stock market by allowing speculators to buy shares to bet on the probability that a candidate will be elected: they are prediction markets
.
Also read and listen:
The value of each action is thus indexed to the perceived chances of the two candidates to win the elections. For example, if in the eyes of bettors, a candidate has a greater chance of winning the presidential election, the value of his stock will follow an upward trend, while the price of the opposing candidate will display a downward trend.
What will be the impacts, however, if in this apparently polarized climate, voters also involve their own pecuniary interests in the outcome of the election? There are going to be some slip-ups
believes the researcher.
People will invest a lot of money […]. The starting point is elections, and this is not the place to make money.
Interesting for strategists, but what impacts?
Electoral betting platforms are not just of interest to bettors. Political parties sometimes find answers more quickly than through polls. Billionaire and Republican ally Elon Musk even praised these platforms on his X account, saying that they were more accurate than polling firms, since real money is being bet
.
Such a statement is a bit premature, according to Antoine Yoshinaka, associate professor in the Department of Political Science at the State University of New York at Buffalo and associate member of the Raoul Dandurand Chair’s Observatory on the United States.
Campaign teams are certainly watching this
however recognizes Mr. Yoshinaka.
Open in full screen mode
Antoine Yoshinaka, professor of political science at the University of New York at Buffalo. (Archive photo)
Photo: Antoine Yoshinaka
The professor explains this interest by the possibility for strategists to observe a little momentum that has not been measured in the polls, which take several days to be published
.
Can this have a real influence on voting? I think that in the end, it will be very limited.
That said, […] any factor that may have a minimal impact here and there could in theory swing the election, just because it’s so close that it’s going to be decided by a few tens of thousands of votes in a few key states
he nuances.
Mr. Yoshinaka nevertheless maintains that it would be risky to claim that prediction markets can provide better insight into voting intentions than polls, as Elon Musk did.
There is variation from site to site, they do not all have the same results […]. There are perhaps sites which attract more pro-Trump people, and others more pro-Harris people, so that is also at play.
notes the professor. It is according to him too early
to assert that they better depict the reality on the ground than the polls.
This analysis can only be carried out after the unveiling of the results of the November 5 elections.
With information from Raphaëlle Drouin and Reuters
