The Problem with Polymarket

Offshore betting markets like Polymarket mislead voters by substituting right-wing “vibes” for data.

In the age of digital disruption, it’s no surprise that offshore betting markets like Polymarket have become a tool for political discourse. This website, funded by Silicon Valley billionaire Peter Thiel and advised by election pundit Nate Silver, allows users to bet on elections by trading shares tied to future outcomes. While Americans cannot bet on U.S. elections, many use VPNs to skirt the rules, introducing a host of issues that undermine the credibility of Polymarket as any serious indicator of political trends.

Despite these glaring problems, right-wing influencers regularly cite Polymarket's odds as though they represent legitimate data. This has become a common tactic for Trump supporters attempting to shore up his 2024 prospects against Vice President Kamala Harris, dismissing hard polling and early voter data. As of mid-October, Harris appears to hold an advantage in early vote returns and recent polling—yet Polymarket would have you believe Trump is in the driver’s seat. We are currently witnessing the 2022 flood the zone with right-wing polls “red wave” strategy on steroids. Democratic strategist and writer of The Hopium Chronicles, Simon Rosenberg, refers to this as “Polymarket Voodoo.”

Take the early voting data: in Michigan, nearly 800,000 people have already voted, with Detroit’s absentee ballot return rate surpassing the statewide average by 9%. In Georgia, early voting shattered records on the first day, with 305,895 ballots cast, more than doubling the record set in 2020. These aren’t "vibes"—they're the numbers that shape the election outcome. And in Pennsylvania, the numbers similarly favor the Democrats, with 66% of mail-in ballots coming from Democratic voters.

However, Polymarket's "odds" tell a different story, showing Trump with a significant lead in these key states. Recently, CNBC’s Joe Kernen dismissively responded to a post from MeidasTouch contributor Fred Wellman by citing Polymarket’s forecast that put Trump’s chances at over 60%, despite multiple polls showing Harris gaining ground. Even CNN’s data analyst, Harry Enten, recently cited Polymarket odds on the air. This speaks to one of the key problems with Polymarket: it creates a false narrative of strength for Trump where the hard data suggests otherwise.

What many fail to understand—or deliberately ignore—is that Polymarket odds are not data. They're driven by the whims of bettors, many of whom may be influenced by biases or even deliberate disinformation. The site is ripe for manipulation by foreign actors, and it can be a dangerous tool in the hands of influencers, who are often paid to promote certain outcomes without disclosing their financial interests. Online influencers have told us they have been approached by affiliates of Polymarket offering them money to “quote tweet” Polymarket posts. We have strongly discouraged anyone who has told us about this from accepting such offers.

We can surmise, based on this information, that other digital influencers are also accepting money to post about Polymarket, thereby manipulating the markets. For example, you will often see Benny Johnson, the MAGA influencer who was found to have been paid millions by Russian agents to post content as part of their arrangement with the right-wing Tenet Media, frequently quote tweet Polymarket, in what could be a similar arrangement. One Polymarket influencer recruiter boasted in a private message, which has been reviewed by MeidasTouch, that the betting platform is offering thousands of dollars per month for as little as one tweet per day highlighting the platform. The recruiter stated that the betting platform has already partnered with “a lot” of other influencers, cutting similar deals.

These posts from influencers are sure to sway the betting odds, especially when a bulk of that promotion is conducted by right wing influencers on X, formerly Twitter, which skews to the right of the traditional political spectrum following Elon Musk’s acquisition of the site. Musk himself recently promoted Trump’s odds on Polymarket, falsely claiming it is “[m]ore accurate than polls, as actual money is on the line.” Since Musk’s post, Trump has soared on the betting website, despite a lack of any significant movement in polls or data that would warrant such a shift in odds. It is unclear if Musk has a financial stake in Polymarket, but we do know he is close with its funder, Thiel.

Polymarket's odds are often wildly inaccurate. A day before Kamala Harris announced Governor Tim Walz as her running mate, Polymarket had Walz at just a 24% chance, while Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro was favored at 63%. This shows how far off the betting markets can be from the reality of campaign decisions and outcomes, proving that it is little more than speculation wrapped in an aura of legitimacy.

This kind of misinformation can have real-world consequences. Polymarket’s manipulation of election odds can convince Trump supporters that any loss in November 2024 must be fraudulent—setting the stage for another January 6. If Trump's supporters believe that betting odds are a more accurate reflection of public sentiment than polls or early voting data, the legitimacy of the actual election results will be further undermined.

A Trump supporter responds to a poll showing VP Harris with a 5-point lead with Polymarket odds

In addition, Polymarket’s heavy reliance on cryptocurrency transactions and off-shore status makes it a playground for bad actors, both foreign and domestic. The use of USDC on the Polygon network allows for a level of anonymity and fluidity that further disconnects Polymarket from any real accountability. That, combined with its shady influencer deals, calls into question any claims of transparency or fairness.

When it comes to understanding where the 2024 election stands, it’s crucial to rely on actual data—early voter turnout, demographic breakdowns, and, yes, scientifically conducted polls. As of this writing, two new highly rated polls show Harris leading Trump by 4-5 points in key battlegrounds. With three weeks to go, if you're basing your expectations on Polymarket, you're likely betting on the wrong horse.

In short, offshore betting markets like Polymarket should never be confused with legitimate data. The misleading nature of these platforms could fuel dangerous post-election narratives, sowing distrust in democracy itself. With hard data favoring Harris in the home stretch, it’s time to stop pretending that betting markets are any more predictive than a coin flip. Let me be clear: this election can go either way. But if you are looking strictly at actual date, such as polls and early voting, you would currently rather be Kamala Harris than Donald Trump. And while no Polymarket Voodoo changes that, it does greatly pollute our discourse.

P.S. MeidasTouch co-founder and host Ben Meiselas spoke with Simon Rosenberg on Tuesday about the latest election data, and Rosenberg gave his thoughts on Polymarket Voodoo. You can watch that on YouTube here: