Bloomberg's Weisenthal calls Dembo race pricing 'admittedly impressive'
Bloomberg columnist Joe Weisenthal posted on X that prediction markets correctly priced Democrat Zach Dembo's race, calling the result 'admittedly impressive.' Weisenthal noted he has been skeptical of prediction markets, mainly because they seem thinly traded and easy to game. In a separate post, he agreed that prediction markets can get it 'Wrong, not just wrong,' and wondered what the 2016 election would have been like had platforms such as Poly and Kalshi existed at the time.
Weisenthal's praise matters because it comes from a vocal skeptic with a Bloomberg platform. His earlier posts and columns have framed prediction markets as thinly traded and manipulable, so an explicit accuracy admission shifts what neutral observers hear. That shift lands while Kalshi and Polymarket are under legal pressure in Ohio and Tennessee. State attorneys general there argue event contracts are gambling, and they cite pricing failures as evidence.
A high-profile validation from a financial media voice does not erase those cases, but it complicates the state narrative that markets are purely speculative. Weisenthal's reach inside regulatory and policy circles means his framing can shape how judges, legislators, and enforcement staff think about predictive value. The timing is tight: midterm results are still unfolding, and platforms need credible third-party voices before the next legal filing drops.
Weisenthal's reluctant accuracy praise joins a running media examination of prediction market reliability that includes a Tennessee station's finding that Kalshi odds are less reliable near primaries, the Brazil election pricing collapse, and broader academic scrutiny of whether these markets improve or distort public understanding of electoral probabilities.