Donald Trump experienced a setback in the betting markets following a wave of bets on Kamala Harris.

The former president had been soaring on a number of betting platforms, but the money was transferred to Harris in recent days.

Four days before the election, prominent betting site Kalshi had a 53 percent chance of Trump winning, compared to Harris’ 47 percent.

As of Tuesday, the former president was at 64 percent and Harris was at 36 percent.

Republican presidential candidate and former U.S. President Donald Trump during a rally in Henderson, Nevada, United States, October 31, 2024.

Vice President Kamala Harris wins in the betting markets

Meanwhile, on Polymarket, Trump’s odds of victory fell from 67 percent on October 30 to 59 percent as of Friday afternoon.

On Friday, the political prediction site Predictit gave Trump a lead of just two points.

On October 29, his lead was 14 points on the site.

During the same period, from October 29 to November 1, Trump’s odds on both bookmakers Bet365 and Paddy Power fell from 66.7% to 63.6%.

Kalshi still had Trump with better odds of winning five of the seven key battleground states: Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, North Carolina and Pennsylvania.

But that gives Harris a better chance in Michigan and Wisconsin.

Pennsylvania is very close with Trump at 52 percent and Harris at 48 percent as of midday Friday.

Election betting live on a digital display kiosk on a New York street

According to Real Clear Politics’ betting market average, Trump still leads Harris 60.6 percent to 38.1 percent.

However, earlier this week, the Republican candidate was at 63.9 percent.

Polls have the election on a knife’s edge and essentially tied, but for weeks, betting markets have consistently given Trump a clear advantage.

It’s unclear what precipitated the change in betting markets in recent days.

On October 27, during Trump’s rally at Madison Square Garden in New York, a comedian made a derogatory joke about Puerto Rico, which sparked widespread backlash.

Kalshi, which is the first legal online election betting platform in the United States, has already taken $92 million in bets on the 2024 race.

Kamala Harris was far behind in the betting markets

A punter makes his decision on the election

This week, Tarek Mansour, its CEO, said punters are a more accurate indicator of the outcome than polls because they have “skin in the game”.

He told DailyMail.com: “We absolutely have to trust the (betting) markets.

“Prediction markets are places where people have money on the line. People don’t lie with their money.

In 2016, polls indicated that Hillary Clinton would easily beat Trump, but they were wrong.

In the past, betting markets have been successful in predicting the outcome of elections.

However, like polls, they were not a good indicator in 2016.

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton shake hands after the presidential debate in Hempstead, New York, September 26, 2016.

betting markets were wrong in 1948 when President Harry S. Truman won; Here he happily displays a premature first edition of the Chicago Daily Tribune from his train in St. Louis, Missouri, after his defeat by Thomas E. Dewey.

As early as 1924, the Wall Street Journal wrote: “Betting odds are generally considered the best indicator of the likely results of presidential campaigns. »

At the time, bookmakers sent people to attend candidate speeches and based odds on audience reaction, according to the newspaper.

According to a study by economists Paul Rhode and Koleman Strumpf, in 15 presidential elections from 1884 to 1940, there was only one upset when the bookmakers were wrong.

However, in 1948, the betting markets, like the polls, were spectacularly wrong in giving President Harry Truman only about a 1 in 10 chance of winning.