Interview Pulled From Broadcast, Uploaded to YouTube The 15‑minute interview with Rep. James Talarico was removed from The Late Show on February 19 because the FCC’s equal‑time rule would have required CBS to give comparable airtime to all qualified Democratic candidates [1]. CBS posted the segment to its official YouTube channel, where it quickly amassed millions of views and set a new platform record [1]. The viral video prompted intense social‑media discussion and placed Talarico at the center of a national conversation about media fairness and election coverage [1].

Betting Platforms Raise Talarico’s Primary Probability Within hours of the YouTube upload, Polymarket listed a 78 percent chance that Talarico would win the March 3 Democratic primary, while Kalshi showed a 76 percent probability, up sharply from roughly 60 percent the previous week [1]. The surge coincided with a $2.5 million influx to Talarico’s campaign in the 24 hours after the video’s release [1]. Early voting in Texas began on February 19, and the primary runoff is scheduled for May 26 if no candidate reaches a majority [1].

Regulators and States Clash Over Prediction‑Market Authority The CFTC’s newly appointed chair, Michael Selig, announced federal backing for Kalshi and Polymarket, arguing that states cannot override the agency’s exclusive jurisdiction over event contracts [3]. Nevada, Massachusetts and other states have sued the platforms as unlicensed sportsbooks, and a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order against Kalshi in Nevada, prompting a “friend of the court” brief from the CFTC [3]. Kalshi operates under CFTC oversight, while Polymarket remains blocked in 33 countries, including the United States, highlighting a fragmented regulatory landscape [2].

Political Figures Deepen Ties to Market Operators Donald Trump Jr. serves as a strategic adviser to Kalshi and invested in Polymarket through his venture‑capital firm, raising conflict‑of‑interest concerns as the administration supports the platforms [3]. Proponents claim that crowd‑sourced betting can surface truth, yet critics warn of gambling harms and the spread of misinformation [2]. The convergence of a high‑profile political interview, soaring prediction‑market odds, and federal regulatory endorsement underscores the growing influence of these platforms on electoral dynamics [1][2][3].