Lawmakers are asking the prediction market operators to show their election markets are free from manipulation and insider trading before the vote.

Senate control odds on prediction markets have swung toward Democrats in the final days of the campaign.

Prediction markets have drawn record election volume, with research suggesting odds can still be moved for a few thousand dollars.

Outlets are publishing live results infrastructure for House, Senate and governor races ahead of Election Day and the count that follows.

Offshore and federally regulated platforms are taking Maryland election wagers even though the state prohibits election betting.

House control odds heavily favor Democrats in final pre-election pricing, though Senate races remain the closer contest.

Polls and market prices diverge ahead of the vote, reviving debate over whether election markets are reliably calibrated.

Statistical forecasters are converging on Democratic Senate odds well above where some market platforms sit.

Maine is among the most heavily traded Senate markets, with millions wagered and questions raised about influence and insider trading.

Texas Senate pricing on Kalshi and Polymarket diverges from public polling in one of the cycle's marquee races.

Late-cycle pricing shifts toward Democrats across swing Senate contests, though polls and markets still diverge in places.

The final pre-election forecast lands alongside an explainer on how to evaluate election models' track records.

Close races and state rules mean definitive control of Congress may take days after polls close.

Analysts flag election-night timing, result disputes and market positioning as key risks for traders.

Texas governor pricing narrowed late in the cycle while the incumbent still holds an edge on the platforms.

The platform's blue wave contract is one of the most-watched aggregate indicators heading into Election Day.

Traders and outlets are comparing pricing and week-over-week shifts across the two largest US election market venues.

Commentators and academics debate whether mass election trading improves information or distorts political incentives.