MMost gamblers might want to sit out the US election. According to official polls, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump are too close to call. But the former president’s campaign has clung to signs it says prove he is in fact “leader.”

In a close race, Trump and his allies claim that some “betting polls,” as he described them last week, gave him a significant lead over Harris. “Like 65 to 35, or something.”

The irony of touting an apparent edge in the gambling markets at a Believers and Ballots campaign event in Georgia aimed at Christian voters was not lost on Trump. “But no one gambles here,” he continued. ‘Is there anyone here who gambles? No, no, no, no. Great Christians don’t gamble, right? Oh no.”

The “betting polls” Trump cited are predictions generated by various election betting platforms that clearly put his chances of regaining the White House better than those of his Democratic rival. With many questioning the accuracy of political polls, supporters including Elon Musk have begun to argue that such estimates are more accurate.

On Wednesday, Polymarket, a leading service, put Trump’s chances of regaining the presidency at about 67%, while Harris was at 33%. Another, Kalshi, rated Trump at 62% and Harris at 38%.

And while Trump’s crowd wasn’t interested in betting on the outcome of the presidential election last Tuesday, many others appear to be getting involved. The high-profile legal battle, promotion by the likes of Musk and Trump, and growing media coverage helped push the activity into the spotlight as the campaign picked up steam.

Interest in betting on this election is “orders of magnitude greater” than in previous elections, according to Thomas Gruca, professor of marketing at the University of Iowa and director of Iowa Electronic Markets, an election-focused futures market first founded in 1988.

The U.S. gambling boom, led by the legalization of sports betting, “has increased the number of people who are happy to throw their money away on things they don’t understand,” Gruca said. “People think, ‘I picked the Raiders-Jets game, therefore I can pick a president.'”

He also pointed to errors in polling in previous elections, and the number of polls this time shows the race to be extremely close. “I haven’t looked at the polls in the last 15 minutes, so I don’t know who will win. There was a lot of clarity in previous years.”

In the magazines and newspapers section of Apple’s iPhone store, Polymarket has taken the top spot, trailing the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and, yes, the Guardian. Another platform, Kalshi, has also risen in the store’s list of financial apps.

“I don’t think it’s a coincidence that these markets have become more popular as trust in the media has declined,” said Harry Crane, a professor of statistics at Rutgers University. “The public wants information and is looking for information sources they can trust.”

If you had turned to, say, Polymarket on Wednesday and bet on Trump, you would receive $1 for every 67 cents you bet if he won the election. If you bet on Harris on the same day, on the same platform, you will receive $1 for every 33 cents you bet if she wins.

These bets are bids on political futures contracts. Buying a contract drives its price – or the perceived probability of doing so – higher.

This ecosystem extends far beyond the race for the White House. Other markets at Kalshi include the margin of victory in the Senate, which state will be closest to the presidential election and what the Federal Reserve will do with interest rates two days after the election.

But how reliable are the main figures? “I think you have to take them seriously,” said Grant Ferguson, a political scientist at Texas Christian University. “The people who bet on these markets largely think they know how things are going more than the average person.”

Leading platforms put Hillary Clinton ahead on Election Day in 2016 (she won the popular vote, if not the presidency), and Joe Biden in the lead in 2020, “but in both cases less than the polls,” Ferguson said. 2024 will be the biggest test yet for these predictions.

“Overall, these markets are actually quite efficient – ​​in particular, they’re quite good at things that are 50:50, 60:40,” says Eric Zitzewitz, an economics professor at Dartmouth College. “In the kind of circumstances we’re in right now… I take that quite seriously.”

Provided a market is “managed efficiently or with good rules, prices before the event happens will reflect what smart people think, not just random people,” Gruca suggested.

The Iowa Electronic Markets allows participants to bet up to $500 on any given contract, and PredictIt, run by Victoria University in Wellington, New Zealand, has a limit of $850. But other platforms don’t have such strict restrictions, and big bets may have shifted the odds in Trump’s favor.

Polymarket, which did not respond to requests for an interview, confirmed last week that one person – a French citizen – was behind four accounts that had placed bets on Trump worth about $28 million, but insisted to the New York Times that this was ‘based on personal views’ rather than an attempt to manipulate the market.

“Without limits,” Gruca said, “you can make prices deviate from what they should be.”

If one person tries to tilt the odds toward their favorite candidate, those betting will quickly back the other if their odds get too low, Ferguson suggested. “Is it likely to happen? Yes,” he said. “But I’m not really worried about it.”

There is a small but significant difference in the question at the center of election surveys and election betting. While survey respondents indicate which candidate they are want to to win, those betting on the match say who they are think shall. Industry veterans like to say that poll takers focus on their hearts, while gamblers use their heads.

The betting markets “ask the most relevant question,” Crane argued. “The polling information is in the markets. The people in the markets know what the polls are, but they have different information.”

Supervisors are not happy. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which fined Polymarket $1.4 million in 2022 and ordered it ban U.S. users as part of a settlement, has sought to shut down PredictIt and Kalshi.

But Kalshi was recently cleared to make U.S. bets on the election outcome when a federal appeals court ruled that the CFTC had failed to show how the organization or the public interest would be harmed by its event contracts.

While the CFTC is attractive, the legal breakthrough appears to have paved the way for a further increase in betting on who will emerge victorious in the presidential campaign – both by individual gamblers and large institutions. Polymarket is also investigating activity on its platform to ensure users are outside the US, amid reports of domestic use.

“The markets are only as smart as the people who trade in them,” Gruca said. “If you are as dumb as a rock and have a lot of money, you can move the markets in any direction simply by moving money.”