Some traders in the New York City mayoral debate mention market felt scammed when Andrew Cuomo, known for his unabashed love of his heritage, didn’t say “Italian.”
One trader named Caleb wrote in a Kalshi comment, “the Italian bait is insane.” Another joked that Cuomo was “Nomo saying Italian.” Many felt like it was a deliberate move by the candidate to make them lose their trades. These kinds of jokes are common on Kalshi, Polymarket, and in Twitter replies whenever a high-confidence mention bet falls through and the speech doesn’t quite match traders’ expectations.
To better understand how political messaging actually comes to light and how that process intersects with prediction markets, I talked with Michael Ricci, current partner at Seven Letter and professor at the Georgetown McCourt School of Public Policy. Ricci is a former senior speechwriter for Speaker of the House John Boehner and most recently served as communications director for Maryland Governor Larry Hogan.
“We’re lagging” Ricci says of comms and prediction markets
Ricci laughed when I asked whether political communications people were following prediction markets.
“I think you’d find that communications professionals — as much as we talk about what the next big thing is — we’re lagging,” he said. “There’s a lag from talking about it to actually starting to interact with it. I remember when people started to talk about AI; it took years before anyone in the comms space actually used it.”
If Cuomo isn’t deliberately watching your portfolio in an attempt to wreck your trades, that’s good news. It means the market can still forecast, not just react.
Political speeches can be predictable and knowable
Even better news for traders is that what politicians are going to say isn’t just predictable, it’s sometimes knowable, according to Ricci.
“You could sit and say, okay, the Treasury Secretary is going to be at these conferences, speaking on these topics,” he said. “You can look at which outlets get excerpts or themes of a speech ahead of time.”
This is not always possible though. Some speeches are finalized weeks in advance; others aren’t locked in until just hours before.
“It depends on the principal,” Ricci said. “Some want it two weeks early, some don’t even look at it until eight hours before. And sometimes you still have to bring a thumb drive to the teleprompter operator in advance of a speech. That technology hasn’t come as far as people think.”
So yes, information can leak out before the speech, meaning traders should be cautious. In Ricci’s words, there are “people close to the principal who have all this information,” and that means some participants in the market may know more than others.
In fact, in some instances, people outside the communications team can request mentions.
“Even I’ve gotten emails from people asking, ‘Can you mention this project?’ or ‘Can you use this phrase?’” he said. “It happens more than you think.”
What politicians don’t want to say also matters
Another tip from Ricci: think about what politicians don’t want to say.
“We sometimes find ways not to mention the thing we’re really talking about,” he said. “You don’t want to rock the boat, so instead of saying ‘Social Security,’ you say ‘entitlement programs.’ Instead of ‘inflation,’ you might say ‘affordability.’”
That kind of linguistic dodge means even when a topic feels inevitable, it might not show up word-for-word in the transcript—just close enough to make traders sweat.
Affordability vs. inflation: All about framing
When I told Ricci that traders had projected 72% odds that the word “inflation“ would be mentioned in the NYC mayoral debate, he was a little surprised.
“That’s interesting,” he said. “But I’d say ‘affordability’ is more likely. ‘Inflation’ you use to blame someone. ‘Affordability’ is how you talk about helping people.”
It’s the kind of small semantic shift that defines the difference between how something is said and how it sounds, what really animates these markets.
Knowing the principal is key
At the end of the day, Ricci said, it all comes down to knowing the principal.
“Trump is obviously a much more extemporaneous speaker than, say, Speaker Johnson,” he said. “You can’t treat them the same. Some people stick to the script; others treat it as a suggestion.”
