Prediction Markets Face Backlash Over Ties to Election-Denying Paid Influencers Ahead of Divisive Midterms

As the United States enters an unusually contentious midterm election cycle, prediction market platforms are already grappling with controversy surrounding the paid political commentators they hired to promote their services. Both Kalshi and Polymarket confirmed to WIRED that they have requested influencers remove "paid partnership" labels from social media posts that questioned the official results of the Los Angeles mayoral election.

When conservative former reality TV star Spencer Pratt fell to third place in the race, trailing incumbent Karen Bass and city councilor Nithya Raman, multiple high-profile right-wing creators published posts casting doubt on the outcome. In one viral post, MAGA influencer Gunther Eagleman — who boasts more than 1.7 million followers — claimed Pratt’s opponents were "stealing" the election. As Semafor first reported, Kalshi asked all involved creators to take down the posts last Friday.

Kalshi does not publicly release the full text of its paid partner contracts, but the platform’s rules explicitly prohibit affiliates from challenging the integrity or accuracy of official election results and any related legal rulings. "These are internal policies to guide our affiliates and partners, and they include standards around the promotion of and marketing of Kalshi markets on elections," spokesperson Dani Lever told WIRED.

For its part, Polymarket has asked two creators to remove paid-partnership tags from posts critical of the Los Angeles election results. One of those posts comes from right-wing influencer Benny Johnson, who argued that the improvement of Raman’s odds on Polymarket reflected "the public has so little faith in California’s elections that they just assume Democrats are going to dramatically rig it." Johnson’s post carried the paid content label from June 4 to June 8, before the partnership tag was taken down.

Johnson did not respond to requests for comment, and has not published any new Polymarket affiliate content since the tag was removed.

"Our existing marketing guidelines explicitly prohibit affiliates from providing misleading or false information, and we will continue to monitor and ensure compliance with our paid contributors," Olivia Chalos, Polymarket’s deputy chief legal officer, told WIRED in a statement.

While Polymarket confirmed its guidelines ban false and misleading claims, the company declined to share the full language of its affiliate contracts. As newsletter Popular Information first reported earlier the same day, many other posts marked as paid partnerships with both Polymarket and Kalshi that push election-denial narratives remain online. This makes clear that enforcing internal guidelines has become a constant game of whack-a-mole for prediction market firms. Polymarket told WIRED it is currently targeting additional accounts that have violated its policies.

Last week, Politico reported that Polymarket Chief Marketing Officer Matthew Modabber pays content creators directly through PayPal, an unorthodox payment arrangement. It remains unclear whether Modabber paid Johnson or right-wing commentator Kangmin Lee — whose post also had its paid tag removed — for these specific partnerships. Polymarket declined to comment on its payment practices for affiliates.

Kalshi and Polymarket host a wide range of politics and election-themed prediction markets, and odds from these platforms are increasingly integrated into mainstream media election coverage. For example, CNN entered a formal partnership with Kalshi late last year. But both platforms face intense scrutiny from lawmakers and regulators: many state officials argue these startups should be regulated as gambling platforms rather than commodity exchanges, and dozens of active lawsuits are seeking to force them to comply with state gambling laws. There is also bipartisan concern that these markets create incentives and opportunities for insider trading and market manipulation.

This latest incident raises a new, underdiscussed red flag: prediction market companies have now entangled their brands with influencers who openly embrace election denialism. The odds that this is a one-off incident, and that this group of outspoken partisan commentators will consistently exercise good judgment when sharing appropriate paid promotional content, are very low.