2024 Pre-Election Political Polls | POLL - Trump would have had 7 point lead over Biden

[Mulberry Heel]

I largely agree with you, but isn't an anonymous message board a great place to express yourself and vent those anxieties? I know I largely cannot discuss my concerns with others around me, so this is a helpful environment.

I suppose if that's what you're comfortable with, but personally I'd much rather find a friend or relative to discuss such concerns with. Doing so on an anonymous board has just never done much for me, especially given the number of trolls on message boards. But if it helps by all means do so. I'd just prefer face-to-face personal interaction than having someone I don't know and have never met try to comfort me or make me feel better on a message board, especially about something like an election.

 

[aGDevil2k]

1. Well, you didn't know that the rallies were indicative of enthusiasm. I didn't either. I thought it was a lot of bullshit. I'm not sure it's not bullshit, but in any event, I don't think I was ignorant in 2016. I think the knowledge didn't exist. I don't think you were ignorant.

2. This whole idea that response rates are down and therefore the polls are bad -- I don't know if the conclusion follows from the premise. Low response rates mean that pollsters have to work harder to get their samples, that's true. But it doesn't necessarily follow that the samples they get are somehow systemically biased. With all the polling we have, only systematic bias is likely to get through a poll average.

Could the low response rates create systematic poll biases? Sure, it could. I can think of a lot of plausible stories consistent with that idea. Maybe Trump supporters have become more eager to talk to pollsters because Trump talks about the polls so much and they want to push him into the lead. Maybe the people who used to respond to polls have had enough, and thus bias in the polls in previous elections could therefore cause the polls to bias the other way (though that is unlikely because of numbers). It could be that the total universe of people who answer polls has shrunk so much that the pollsters are basically just sampling the same people over and over again (though this story also potentially runs into number problems).

But we don't know any of that to be true. It's also possible that the samples pollsters have obtained are, in fact, representative and the only issue was the difficulty and cost of obtaining them. The fact that the polls are commonly weighting by recalled vote, and the polls that don't tend to favor Kamala in the EC, gives me some hope. That's an unreliable method and I think it's being used as an ad hoc patch of uncertain validity. But again, we don't know.

If there are variances in response rates among key demographics that absolutely can impact poll quality. Across the board. For every poll

 

[BillOfRights]

it's not data but he is a savvy politico

'This sucker is baked': Bush adviser explains why he's certain Harris has already won

'This sucker is baked': Bush adviser explains why he's certain Harris has already won A core adviser to George W. Bush and Sen. John McCain made an election prediction Friday which he said was almost certain: “This sucker is baked.” Mark McKinnon, who served as the chief media adviser for...

www.lipstickalley.com

Everything he says makes sense in a non-trump election, but when trump is on the ballot, regular-world data, indicators, and experience are irrelevant. If polls had Harris up 10 points, I would still be worried. Silent-trump voters, misogyny, racism, and disinformation are factors that I haven't seen captured or represented. Biden was up in the polls, won the popular vote by 4.4%, and it was still a squeaker. I pray I'm wrong and you and McKinnon are right.

 

[finesse]

Everything he says makes sense in a non-trump election, but when trump is on the ballot, regular-world data, indicators, and experience are irrelevant. If polls had Harris up 10 points, I would still be worried. Silent-trump voters, misogyny, racism, and disinformation are factors that I haven't seen captured or represented. Biden was up in the polls, won the popular vote by 4.4%, and it was still a squeaker. I pray I'm wrong and you and McKinnon are right.

Ain't none of them silent about anything anymore. More likely the other way around in Purple land.

 

[aGDevil2k]

I clicked on a Twitter post, and accidentally got flooded with Trump and maga talking about him having a 93% chance to win from RCP.


They are using a Nate silver Stat, applying it to blanket RCP with red wave polls in there, and making a weird extrapolation. And the same post is now everywhere and he's seen it. So it's just a big maga orgy on that site

The monolithic nature is why they cannot believe he could lose

 

[superrific]

If there are variances in response rates among key demographics that absolutely can impact poll quality. Across the board. For every poll

Why? And why would those polling errors be systematic? If they eventually get the "right number" of respondents, and/or weight appropriately, then why is that necessarily worse than equally low response rates among voters? It does require assumptions about "the right number," but that's why we look at polling averages.

Idk. It's been a while since I did stats, and I didn't really do stats in this particular way, and I know you have a technical background. So I'm not sure I'm right here. Far from it. I just have not found an adequate explanation why "low response rates, even variable ones" -> bad and systemically biased polls.

 

[UNCBAdookJD]

Sure. Large bets, made by foreign sources, and (4) specific offshore bets spiking in Trump’s favor give indications of Trump’s chances.

Sure seems like intentional market manipulation.

Tell me again how that’s a strong indicator for results?

1. Well, you didn't know that the rallies were indicative of enthusiasm. I didn't either. I thought it was a lot of bullshit. I'm not sure it's not bullshit, but in any event, I don't think I was ignorant in 2016. I think the knowledge didn't exist. I don't think you were ignorant.

2. This whole idea that response rates are down and therefore the polls are bad -- I don't know if the conclusion follows from the premise. Low response rates mean that pollsters have to work harder to get their samples, that's true. But it doesn't necessarily follow that the samples they get are somehow systemically biased. With all the polling we have, only systematic bias is likely to get through a poll average.

Could the low response rates create systematic poll biases? Sure, it could. I can think of a lot of plausible stories consistent with that idea. Maybe Trump supporters have become more eager to talk to pollsters because Trump talks about the polls so much and they want to push him into the lead. Maybe the people who used to respond to polls have had enough, and thus bias in the polls in previous elections could therefore cause the polls to bias the other way (though that is unlikely because of numbers). It could be that the total universe of people who answer polls has shrunk so much that the pollsters are basically just sampling the same people over and over again (though this story also potentially runs into number problems).

But we don't know any of that to be true. It's also possible that the samples pollsters have obtained are, in fact, representative and the only issue was the difficulty and cost of obtaining them. The fact that the polls are commonly weighting by recalled vote, and the polls that don't tend to favor Kamala in the EC, gives me some hope. That's an unreliable method and I think it's being used as an ad hoc patch of uncertain validity. But again, we don't know.

I think polls at this point operate like jury duty. Juries/poll respondents are composed of the people too stupid to get out of it, with a small helping of people who are weirdly excited to do it thrown in. The hard work of qualifying a jury/poll respondent pool among those left eventually gets you to an answer that seems like it might make sense, but sometimes crazy shit happens because of who's actually in there.

 

[BillOfRights]

I appreciate you guys optimism but right not the trends don’t look good.

I feel you. My mental health is on the edge right now. I can't explain how much better my life will be when trump is over. Some of it is knowing actual bad shit that will happen if he becomes President again, some of it is knowing there will be bad shit I can't even imagine, and some of it is being unable to control these thoughts in my own mind. It's like for the last several months I'm watching everything I love being tied to the train tracks, and for the next two weeks, knowing the train is coming. Even if Harris wins, it won't be over until noon on January 20, 2025, but at least I will know that the United States, the concept of democracy, and the rest of the world will have a fighting chance.

And for those who feel I'm overreacting, I hope you're right. I know there are those on the other side who feel the same way about Harris, but they would feel that way about any Democratic nominee. I think I'm basing my fear on facts and documented evidence, and they are basing theirs on fox news, elon musk, other right-wing media, and disinformation.

Best case scenario: Harris wins comfortably, you all were right, and I get some help while knowing the world will continue its messy path forward.
Next best case: Harris wins a nail biter, I'm not paranoid, and the world will continue its messy path forward.
All other scenarios are untenable. Idiocracy would almost be preferable.

 

[BillOfRights]

I do not wish to make people feel hopeless. I just try to cull and share possibly relevant information as it becomes available.

I could discontinue the poll and turnout data posting here — it’s not like you can’t all find it easily enough if you want to do so.

Please continue to share. Information, even if it's just polls or even red-wave polls, gives us the opportunity to make informed decisions.

 

[CFordUNC]

 

[HeelYeah2012]

I do not wish to make people feel hopeless. I just try to cull and share possibly relevant information as it becomes available.

I could discontinue the poll and turnout data posting here — it’s not like you can’t all find it easily enough if you want to do so.

Please keep posting it here. One of the main reasons I visit the board. No way you should feel a need to stop sharing great information just because it makes some posters nervous to read.

 

[gtyellowjacket]

I've read some articles recently which have pointed out that despite the ups and downs of polling, in general the polls have been remarkably stable over the past couple of months, and they have consistently given Kamala a lead. Of course I'm skeptical of polls in general this year, but I do think as we get closer to election day a lot of very anxious Democrats are freaking out (and not without reason, I might add, given that Trump might win). And my guess is that this anxiety will get worse for some people as we get closer to the election. The trauma of 2016 for Democrats is very real.

I think it really depends on the poll. I think at this point, everyone knows Kamala is very likely to win the popular vote. It's the swing states that matter.

 

[rodoheel]

At least since 1980 but they were overseas.

Election odds have existed that long? Or polymarket has existed that long?

 

[CFordUNC]

With all sincerely due respect, and with the genuine understanding and empathy that different folks are feeling different levels of stress and anxiety about the election, I think that some/many Democrats need to get a grip in these last two weeks of the election season. Literally nothing has changed in this race over the last several weeks. Borrowing and paraphrasing from Simon Rosenberg's blog:

• Harris has a 2-4 point lead in the national popular vote, is closer to 270 in the battleground states, and has far better favorables/unfavorables than Trump. She is better liked, and more likable, and that matters as people make up their mind in the closing days.
• The Democrats' financial and ground game advantages means more ads and direct voter contacts in the final days, making it far more likely that Democrats move a close election towards them than Republicans move it towards themselves. The early vote is running very strong for Democrats in MI, NE and WI, and is a dogfight in the remaining battlegrounds. Also note that the numbers in Michigan right now are only from Detroit. Early voting in the rest of the state does not begin until October 26. That includes Ann Arbor, including University of Michigan, and Michigan State in East Lansing.
• Since Dobbs it has been the Democratic Party who has been overperforming public polls, and Republicans/Trump who have been underperforming. What reason do we have to believe that the trend will be bucked?
• The GOP underperformance in battleground Senate and Goubernatorial races (especially Kari Lake and Mark Robinson) remains a problem for Trump and Republicans more broadly, as does the unprecedented efforts by Republicans and former Republicans to persuade Republicans to vote for Harris.
• Abortion ballot initiatives can and should give Democrats an extra boost in a few key places in red/swing states.
• Be aware of the magnitude of the 2024 red wave effort. It has far bigger than 2022 and includes new actors like Polymarket and Elon Musk. They are working hard to create the impression that the election is slipping away from Democrats when it isn’t. In the past few days they launched a major effort to drive down the national polling averages, which has moved things a bit. They would only be flooding the zone with their polls if they didn’t think they were winning the election.
• The Democratic candidate isn’t unraveling on camera every day, and ducking challenging interviews and debates. The Democratic candidate isn’t a rapist, fraudster, traitor and 34 times felon, and the oldest person to be the nominee of an American political party. The Democratic candidate, the Vice President of the United States of America, is running an exceptionally strong, winning, optimistic, campaign committed to opportunity and freedom for all.

The Democrats are winning the election, but have not won it yet. It is by no means a foregone conclusion that Harris will win. It is entirely possible that Trump could win. There is work to do between now and the closing of the polls on November 5. But in every way imaginable, you'd much, much, much rather be in the Democratic presidential ticket's position right now than the Republicans' ticket.

 

[WBroylesH]

With all sincerely due respect, and with the genuine understanding and empathy that different folks are feeling different levels of stress and anxiety about the election, I think that some/many Democrats need to get a grip in these last two weeks of the election season. Literally nothing has changed in this race over the last several weeks. Borrowing and paraphrasing from Simon Rosenberg's blog:

• Harris has a 2-4 point lead in the national popular vote, is closer to 270 in the battleground states, and has far better favorables/unfavorables than Trump. She is better liked, and more likable, and that matters as people make up their mind in the closing days.
• The Democrats' financial and ground game advantages means more ads and direct voter contacts in the final days, making it far more likely that Democrats move a close election towards them than Republicans move it towards themselves. The early vote is running very strong for Democrats in MI, NE and WI, and is a dogfight in the remaining battlegrounds. Also note that the numbers in Michigan right now are only from Detroit. Early voting in the rest of the state does not begin until October 26. That includes Ann Arbor, including University of Michigan, and Michigan State in East Lansing.
• Since Dobbs it has been the Democratic Party who has been overperforming public polls, and Republicans/Trump who have been underperforming. What reason do we have to believe that the trend will be bucked?
• The GOP underperformance in battleground Senate and Goubernatorial races (especially Kari Lake and Mark Robinson) remains a problem for Trump and Republicans more broadly, as does the unprecedented efforts by Republicans and former Republicans to persuade Republicans to vote for Harris.
• Abortion ballot initiatives can and should give Democrats an extra boost in a few key places in red/swing states.
• Be aware of the magnitude of the 2024 red wave effort. It has far bigger than 2022 and includes new actors like Polymarket and Elon Musk. They are working hard to create the impression that the election is slipping away from Democrats when it isn’t. In the past few days they launched a major effort to drive down the national polling averages, which has moved things a bit. They would only be flooding the zone with their polls if they didn’t think they were winning the election.
• The Democratic candidate isn’t unraveling on camera every day, and ducking challenging interviews and debates. The Democratic candidate isn’t a rapist, fraudster, traitor and 34 times felon, and the oldest person to be the nominee of an American political party. The Democratic candidate, the Vice President of the United States of America, is running an exceptionally strong, winning, optimistic, campaign committed to opportunity and freedom for all.

The Democrats are winning the election, but have not won it yet. It is by no means a foregone conclusion that Harris will win. It is entirely possible that Trump could win. There is work to do between now and the closing of the polls on November 5. But in every way imaginable, you'd much, much, much rather be in the Democratic presidential ticket's position right now than the Republicans' ticket.

All good points. One good run of "She's for they/them" ads can cancel that out.

 

[tallheel95]

I do not wish to make people feel hopeless. I just try to cull and share possibly relevant information as it becomes available.

I could discontinue the poll and turnout data posting here — it’s not like you can’t all find it easily enough if you want to do so.

Keep posting the polls if you will. But here's the truth -- this election is going to play out how it plays out, and the polls can't factually tell us what will or will not happen in November. This actually reminds me a lot of my experience when I used to follow weather modeling and forecasting a few years ago. People (meaning me, myself and I) would breathlessly wait for every model run during a potential snowstorm, thinking it would somehow tell me what the storm would bring... but the reality is that the weather just did what it wanted to, models be damned. Often the forecasts weren't even that accurate. You just can't know in advance every factor that will influence the outcome, or sample every bit of data. I came to understand the term "wishcasting" -- holding onto the one model from three days ago that says it's going to dump 10" of snow when climatology and common sense suggest a half an inch of cold rain. Lotta wishcasting going on with both sides here in this election. (But find me a poll that says that Kamala is up +4 and I will hug tight to that outcome!)

 

[CFordUNC]

All good points. One good run of "She's for they/them" ads can cancel that out.

I hear you for sure. It's possible, but I very highly doubt those types of ads- and I've seen them down here in Alabama where I live- move any voter who wasn't already going to vote for Trump. Normal people juat aren't moved by that kind of weirdness. Many Republicans are, because many Republicans aren't normal people.

 

[Calheel]

Well it seems like one of us is wearing a tin foil hat. Guess we'll find out in a couple of weeks who the crazy one is.

No, because the betting markets are highly volatile. They could swing to Kamala by election day and then both of you could claim victory. It would be a mistake to assume that betting markets will stay in Trump's favor through election day. They may, but that is far from a foregone conclusion.

 

[Paine]

All good points. One good run of "She's for they/them" ads can cancel that out.

Do people really care about that garbage? It didn’t play well in 2022, but I suppose that could be because it was a midterm year and low propensity voters didn’t turn out. If the theory is that low propensity voters are more motivated by trans panic and more likely to vote in 24 than 22, then I guess it makes sense.

Idk, I just can’t imagine that being something that people care about.

 

[BillOfRights]

With all sincerely due respect, and with the genuine understanding and empathy that different folks are feeling different levels of stress and anxiety about the election, I think that some/many Democrats need to get a grip in these last two weeks of the election season. Literally nothing has changed in this race over the last several weeks. Borrowing and paraphrasing from Simon Rosenberg's blog:

• Harris has a 2-4 point lead in the national popular vote, is closer to 270 in the battleground states, and has far better favorables/unfavorables than Trump. She is better liked, and more likable, and that matters as people make up their mind in the closing days.
• The Democrats' financial and ground game advantages means more ads and direct voter contacts in the final days, making it far more likely that Democrats move a close election towards them than Republicans move it towards themselves. The early vote is running very strong for Democrats in MI, NE and WI, and is a dogfight in the remaining battlegrounds. Also note that the numbers in Michigan right now are only from Detroit. Early voting in the rest of the state does not begin until October 26. That includes Ann Arbor, including University of Michigan, and Michigan State in East Lansing.
• Since Dobbs it has been the Democratic Party who has been overperforming public polls, and Republicans/Trump who have been underperforming. What reason do we have to believe that the trend will be bucked?
• The GOP underperformance in battleground Senate and Goubernatorial races (especially Kari Lake and Mark Robinson) remains a problem for Trump and Republicans more broadly, as does the unprecedented efforts by Republicans and former Republicans to persuade Republicans to vote for Harris.
• Abortion ballot initiatives can and should give Democrats an extra boost in a few key places in red/swing states.
• Be aware of the magnitude of the 2024 red wave effort. It has far bigger than 2022 and includes new actors like Polymarket and Elon Musk. They are working hard to create the impression that the election is slipping away from Democrats when it isn’t. In the past few days they launched a major effort to drive down the national polling averages, which has moved things a bit. They would only be flooding the zone with their polls if they didn’t think they were winning the election.
• The Democratic candidate isn’t unraveling on camera every day, and ducking challenging interviews and debates. The Democratic candidate isn’t a rapist, fraudster, traitor and 34 times felon, and the oldest person to be the nominee of an American political party. The Democratic candidate, the Vice President of the United States of America, is running an exceptionally strong, winning, optimistic, campaign committed to opportunity and freedom for all.

The Democrats are winning the election, but have not won it yet. It is by no means a foregone conclusion that Harris will win. It is entirely possible that Trump could win. There is work to do between now and the closing of the polls on November 5. But in every way imaginable, you'd much, much, much rather be in the Democratic presidential ticket's position right now than the Republicans' ticket.

and yet, it's a coin toss.