Share 
Bonus TL;DR
- Kalshi and Polymarket have handled more than $750 million in combined trading on 2026 U.S. election markets, marking a transition from a niche novelty to a major financial and political influence.
- Election officials warn that the rapid growth of these markets poses operational risks, citing instances of post-election disinformation fueled by market influencers and recent cases of candidates being fined for insider trading on their own races.
Kalshi and Polymarket have handled more than $750 million in combined trading on 2026 U.S. election markets, according to CNN, turning the midterms into a major test case for how prediction platforms can shape campaigns, donors and election administration.
The scale matters because these markets are no longer a niche product. CNN reported that election officials, campaign operatives and traders said the platforms are influencing how races are discussed and monitored, while also creating new concerns about misinformation, insider trading and disputes over how contracts are settled.
Election markets are moving from novelty to major volume
CNN said the most active contracts now span high-profile state and federal races. On Kalshi, the biggest markets included Los Angeles mayor winner at $96.9 million in volume, Florida Republican governor nominee at $71 million, and California governor winner at $52.5 million.
On Polymarket, the most-watched contracts included balance of power in Congress after the midterms at $13.5 million, which party will win the U.S. House at $12.2 million, and which party will win the U.S. Senate at $5 million.
Kalshi’s head of politics growth, Benjamin Freeman, told CNN that election prediction markets are “well-calibrated” and can absorb new information faster than polls. A Polymarket spokesperson told CNN the platform offers “transparent, accurate, real-time information” and called it “an antidote to the disinformation poisoning public dialogue.”
CNN also highlighted individual trading gains. Dan Rogalski, a Seattle software engineer, told the outlet he has made $600,000 across prediction platforms and was ranked 20th on Kalshi’s election-trader leaderboard as of Thursday.
Officials warn of disinformation, turnout and insider-trading risks
Election officials interviewed by CNN said the growth of political prediction trading is creating real operational and public-confidence problems. Dean Logan, Los Angeles County’s top election official, said he wishes election markets “would go away” and described post-primary disinformation in Los Angeles as “destructive.”
The Los Angeles mayoral primary became a focal point after markets indicated Karen Bass would advance with Spencer Pratt, but Pratt later finished third after additional vote counting. CNN reported that paid social media influencers for Kalshi and Polymarket spread false conspiracy claims about late ballots and vote totals after that race.
Other officials told CNN they worry market prices could discourage turnout if voters interpret odds as a fixed forecast. Barb Byrum, an election official in Michigan, said, “People are looking to betting market as indicators for who will win, and that’s dangerous.”
CNN also reported that the first public political insider-trading cases surfaced in April, when Kalshi fined and suspended three minor candidates for betting on their own races. Kalshi later disclosed additional cases, including Laurie Buckhout, the Republican nominee in a North Carolina House race, who apologized and paid a fine of about $2,600.
What comes next for prediction platforms
The report points to a few unresolved pressure points. Some counties have adopted formal bans against election trading, according to CNN, though the article did not specify which ones. A separate dispute over Kalshi’s settlement of an Alaska top-four Senate primary market also raised questions about how clearly election contracts are written and resolved.
For operators, the next key issue is whether rising political trading volume will bring tighter restrictions or enforcement. CNN said the article did not answer whether regulators will impose new limits, but the midterms are already becoming a real-world stress test for how far U.S. election prediction markets can expand.
Source: As reported by Marshall Cohen; Patrick Svitek.
