Welcome to our community

Be apart of something great, join today!

Register Log in

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

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 6K
  • Views: 183K
  • Politics 
superrific said:
Basketball player 1: scores in three consecutive games 14 14 16
Basketball player 2: scores in three consecutive games 10 12 27

If we define "winning" as scoring more points than the other player in a game, Player 1 wins twice (14>10, 14>12).
But 2 averages more points per game.
Click to expand...
Well, that might depend whether you are using mean, median or mode. I'm not sure mean is the logical way for Nate to present the electoral college "average". Median probably makes more sense.
 
Reading there are signs it's not just Puerto Ricans that are quickly moving to Harris after MSG and the garbage stuff... More Latino groups as well may be moving more
 
So, to refresh our memories, my husband and I went back and watched the news coverage of election nights in 1980 (nbc — it showed up in our YouTube feed, which basically started the rabbit hole), 2012 (nbc), 2016 (nbc) and 2020 (nbc), as well as a quick summary of the 2000 election — just watched the opening mood and skimmed for big calls/exit polling moments.

The 1980 one was hilarious - quick good evening everyone, here is how the electoral college works, we just called some smothers states for Reagan and are calling the election. Like they basically said Reagan is going to win at about 730 ET.

The 2012 election coverage was pretty calm even though it was a super close race ( also found a CNN article from election eve that sounds exactly like ones we are reading this weekend — running out of synonyms for close, tied in the battlegrounds, etc.). Lots of familiar talking points but a different set of swing states (FL and OH the keys, but NC was sort of the last one of the nine swing states and they called it for Romney after a few hours). You could really start to see things breaking Obama’s way between 10-11 ET. They talked up the growing use of early voting and how NC was a leading state with a lot of our voters choosing that route.

The 2016 coverage was sort of celebratory and more energetic in the opening — and while they talked about the polls closing in the last few days, they clearly were planning on a Clinton win. Things started looking grim between 8 and 9 pm for Clinton as the expected Dem surge never materialized, and then the floodgates open between 9 and 10. By about 11:30 that night, it was pretty clear Clinton had badly underperformed in blue urban areas in South Florida . The coverage was increasingly manic and they spent a lot of time between their magic wall and their two exit poll experts. A key to the race was late deciders broke about 2-1 to Trump and double haters likewise broke 2-1 to Trump (presumably a lot of overlap among those voters).

The 2020 coverage was insanely manic from the start. We just skimmed first few hours and the main take-away was how Biden was holding slim leads but well underperforming expected margins.

Anyway, interesting but sobering. The undecided electorate broke to Romney late in 2012, but not by a wide enough margin; it looked like for a while Romney might win the popular vote but lose the EC. Undecideds broke hard Trump late in 2016 in the last few weeks and there were a lot of them.
 
nycfan said:
So, to refresh our memories, my husband and I went back and watched the news coverage of election nights in 1980 (nbc — it showed up in our YouTube feed, which basically started the rabbit hole), 2012 (nbc), 2016 (nbc) and 2020 (nbc), as well as a quick summary of the 2000 election — just watched the opening mood and skimmed for big calls/exit polling moments.

The 1980 one was hilarious - quick good evening everyone, here is how the electoral college works, we just called some smothers states for Reagan and are calling the election. Like they basically said Reagan is going to win at about 730 ET.

The 2012 election coverage was pretty calm even though it was a super close race ( also found a CNN article from election eve that sounds exactly like ones we are reading this weekend — running out of synonyms for close, tied in the battlegrounds, etc.). Lots of familiar talking points but a different set of swing states (FL and OH the keys, but NC was sort of the last one of the nine swing states and they called it for Romney after a few hours). You could really start to see things breaking Obama’s way between 10-11 ET. They talked up the growing use of early voting and how NC was a leading state with a lot of our voters choosing that route.

The 2016 coverage was sort of celebratory and more energetic in the opening — and while they talked about the polls closing in the last few days, they clearly were planning on a Clinton win. Things started looking grim between 8 and 9 pm for Clinton as the expected Dem surge never materialized, and then the floodgates open between 9 and 10. By about 11:30 that night, it was pretty clear Clinton had badly underperformed in blue urban areas in South Florida . The coverage was increasingly manic and they spent a lot of time between their magic wall and their two exit poll experts. A key to the race was late deciders broke about 2-1 to Trump and double haters likewise broke 2-1 to Trump (presumably a lot of overlap among those voters).

The 2020 coverage was insanely manic from the start. We just skimmed first few hours and the main take-away was how Biden was holding slim leads but well underperforming expected margins.

Anyway, interesting but sobering. The undecided electorate broke to Romney late in 2012, but not by a wide enough margin; it looked like for a while Romney might win the popular vote but lose the EC. Undecideds broke hard Trump late in 2016 in the last few weeks and there were a lot of them.
Click to expand...
To revisit the 2016 coverage would be a particular form of torture. Kudos to you for sitting through all that.
 
tallheel95 said:
To revisit the 2016 coverage would be a particular form of torture. Kudos to you for sitting through all that.
Click to expand...
The pit in my stomach definitely came back from that night. I remember sitting with a notebook furiously calculating what percentage of remaining votes in South Florida that Clinton needed to come back and win and realizing it was going quickly from difficult to improbable to impossible.
 
nycfan said:
So, to refresh our memories, my husband and I went back and watched the news coverage of election nights in 1980 (nbc — it showed up in our YouTube feed, which basically started the rabbit hole), 2012 (nbc), 2016 (nbc) and 2020 (nbc), as well as a quick summary of the 2000 election — just watched the opening mood and skimmed for big calls/exit polling moments.

The 1980 one was hilarious - quick good evening everyone, here is how the electoral college works, we just called some smothers states for Reagan and are calling the election. Like they basically said Reagan is going to win at about 730 ET.

The 2012 election coverage was pretty calm even though it was a super close race ( also found a CNN article from election eve that sounds exactly like ones we are reading this weekend — running out of synonyms for close, tied in the battlegrounds, etc.). Lots of familiar talking points but a different set of swing states (FL and OH the keys, but NC was sort of the last one of the nine swing states and they called it for Romney after a few hours). You could really start to see things breaking Obama’s way between 10-11 ET. They talked up the growing use of early voting and how NC was a leading state with a lot of our voters choosing that route.

The 2016 coverage was sort of celebratory and more energetic in the opening — and while they talked about the polls closing in the last few days, they clearly were planning on a Clinton win. Things started looking grim between 8 and 9 pm for Clinton as the expected Dem surge never materialized, and then the floodgates open between 9 and 10. By about 11:30 that night, it was pretty clear Clinton had badly underperformed in blue urban areas in South Florida . The coverage was increasingly manic and they spent a lot of time between their magic wall and their two exit poll experts. A key to the race was late deciders broke about 2-1 to Trump and double haters likewise broke 2-1 to Trump (presumably a lot of overlap among those voters).

The 2020 coverage was insanely manic from the start. We just skimmed first few hours and the main take-away was how Biden was holding slim leads but well underperforming expected margins.

Anyway, interesting but sobering. The undecided electorate broke to Romney late in 2012, but not by a wide enough margin; it looked like for a while Romney might win the popular vote but lose the EC. Undecideds broke hard Trump late in 2016 in the last few weeks and there were a lot of them.
Click to expand...
1980 brought about the networks not calling the election until all polls had closed nationwide.****

Many on the West Coast thought the early call by the networks negatively influenced races on the West Coast.

****It might be possible to call things when the polls in HI and AK are still open. They’re 5 hours behind the East Coast.
 
Zoo_View said:
1980 brought about the networks not calling the election until all polls had closed nationwide.****

Many on the West Coast thought the early call by the networks negatively influenced races on the West Coast.

****It might be possible to call things when the polls in HI and AK are still open. They’re 5 hours behind the East Coast.
Click to expand...
Yep, I do recall that. Was still funny to see them say thanks for joining us but the election is over. They also explained how to read their color charts for viewers watching on a black and white TV.
 
Bigs23 said:
What are the major takeaways?
Click to expand...
My mom forwarded me this email by Thomas Mills from PoliticsNC with his take on the early voting data:


[td width="550px"]
Early voting has ended in North Carolina. I’ll give a brief analysis but first want to give a general update on items that should give Democrats hope. First, Harris campaign advisor David Plouffe tweeted Friday that the campaign’s internal data shows late deciders are breaking for Harris by double digits. I think that makes sense. A few weeks ago, a friend who’s spent decades working in politics postulated that undecided voters who have known Trump for eight years and still aren’t sold on him aren’t likely to vote for him. The fiasco at Madison Square Garden and his erratic behavior going down the stretch may have sealed the deal for some of those voters. For the most part, I have successfully ignored the polls down the stretch. It was easier than I thought, though I have paid some attention to the debate over polling that’s played out on twitter and elsewhere. I think the election has been too close and getting realistic samples too difficult to make them reliable. I don’t even look at the averages.
That said, one poll came out yesterday that made everybody following politics take notice. Ann Selzer is a legendary pollster from Iowa. She knows her state and stays in her lane. In 2026, she got national attention because her final presidential poll picked up trends that showed Trump winning by margins nobody expected. She proved to be right, as she usually is.
Yesterday, Selzer released a poll showing Harris leading in Iowa by three points, 47-44. Republicans immediately screamed, calling the poll an outlier, though nobody trashed the pollster. More astute observers noted that even if the toplines are off, the underlying data should make Trump very worried. Older women are backing Harris by more than two-to-one, 63-28. And independent voters are breaking for Harris by a margin of 46-39 and independent women support her by 23 points.
The poll suggests that other pollsters may be missing a shift among older conservative women, especially in the Midwest. Women may be supporting Harris by larger margins than other polls show. In North Carolina, according to exit polls, Biden won women by seven points while Trump won men by eleven. If Harris wins women by the same margin Trump wins men, she’ll win the state since women have about a ten point advantage in the electorate.
Finally, Trump is going into the final days of the election still trying to win with his base. He’s made little attempt to win moderate voters. Instead, he’s kept to bombastic rhetoric that appeals to the people who show up at his rallies. Trump’s voters turned out in sky high numbers in 2020 and he doesn’t have many ways to expand the electorate except among a tiny slice of predominantly white voters who sat out the election four years ago. They are likely non-college educated, low information voters who he is now trying to scare into the polls. His other goal is to suppress votes from low-information Black and brown voters who are more conservative on social issues. That’s a narrow strategy to win.

​
All in all, I think Harris is in a pretty good position. I would rather be her than him. Still, the election is far too close to know what will happen with Election Day turnout.
And that gets us to the end of early voting here in North Carolina. We don’t really have any great comparisons for the electorate that has voted so far. Overall, there are almost 400,000 more votes at this point in the election than there were four years ago. Unaffiliated voters make up the largest share, with 1,492,000 voters. Republicans trail them by about 14,000 votes and Democrats trail Republicans by about 40,000. Mail-in ballots will continue to come in for the next two days, dominated by Democrats and unaffiliated voters.
Republicans have their first early vote program ever in the state and they should be satisfied with the results. They increased their early vote total by 110,000 over 2020. That’s solid.
Democrats, for their part, are down about 14,000 from their 2020 early vote total, but back then, they were voting by mail in large numbers due to the pandemic. The comparison is a bit concerning, but it’s not apples-to-apples, either.
About 17,000 more Black voters showed up for in-person early voting than four years ago. In total, 791,000 African Americans voted early. Democrats need about 300,000 Black voters to show up on Election Day. A little more than half of that number are likely voters and another 190,000 or so are sporadic voters. About 325,000 would be first time voters.
The big question is about unaffiliated voters. About 250,000 more unaffiliated voters voted early this year than four years ago. About a third of them are 40 years old or younger. They skew slightly more female than male by about 52-47. Eighteen percent of the unaffiliated voters are first time voters and almost two-thirds of them are under 40 years old.
It’s hard to discern too much from the early vote totals in North Carolina other than to bet the election is going to be close once again. Election Day turnout and how unaffiliated voters break will determine the election. Democrats need to have a better showing on Tuesday than they have had in past elections, but that’s doable in the post-pandemic world. Republicans need to make sure they hold onto their turnout advantage from 2020 and hope they aren’t losing women or Haley voters. It’s another nail-biter in the Old North State.
​
​
[/td]​
Click to expand...
 
GQNC said:
Seems that our local Harris campaign organizer I talked to today would agree with you. He is basing his optimism on campaign internal data. As far as timing, he thinks NC will be called for Harris election night.
Early voting ballots and mail in ballots will be counted before polls close Tuesday according to him.

He is pumped and didn’t appear to have just been smoking the good stuff.
Click to expand...
1) North Carolina historically counts its ballots quickly - Western North Carolina might be slower than normal; but, the mountains have historically been slower to report than the rest of the state. If WNC is slower than normal to report, it’s fairly easy to extrapolate how it’ll vote and then project the state’s results.

2) I doubt a “local Harris campaign organizer” is privy to “campaign internal data.”
 
Bigs23 said:
What are the major takeaways?
Click to expand...
Strong women turnout as percentage of electorate, disappointing Black turnout in early voting.

GOP turnout exceeded GOP registration as % of electorate. [GOP 29.9%!of registrants but 33.7% of early voters; Ds also over-performed slightly, with 31.3% of registered voters and 32.2% of early voters — the difference comes out of lower turnout among unaffiliated]. Dems had a 6-point edge in early voting turnout in 2020.

Dems lead mail-in ballots but that’s probably only going to be 5% or so of the total votes cast. Key to see what turnout looks like on Tuesday b

NC has 7.8 million registered voters total, and nearly 4.2 million have voted early (will go up incrementally for mail-in votes that arrive tomorrow or Tuesday).

if we are returning to pre-pandemic voting patterns, between 30-33% of the total votes cast will happen on Election Day. If so, NC will have about 6 million total votes cast at the low end of that range, which at 76.9% of registered voters would surpass the 2020 turnout record of 75%, which feels a bit unlikely.

If Election Day turnout is as light as 2020 (only 16% of the total), the total turnout will end up being about 5 million for a much lower overall turnout of about 64.1% — about the same as 2004 and well below range of 68% - 75% turnout since.
 
Last edited:
nycfan said:
Strong women turnout as percentage of electorate, disappointing Black turnout in early voting.

GOP turnout exceeded GOP registration as % of electorate. [GOP 29.9%!of registrants but 33.7% of early voters; Ds also over-performed slightly, with 31.3% of registered voters and 32.2% of early voters — the difference comes out of lower turnout among unaffiliated]

Dems lead mail-in ballots but that’s probably only going to be 5% or so of the total votes cast. Key to see what turnout looks like on Tuesday b

NC has 7.8 million registered voters total, and nearly 4.2 million have voted early (will go up incrementally for mail-in votes that arrive tomorrow or Tuesday).

if we are returning to pre-pandemic voting patterns, between 30-33% of the total votes cast will happen on Election Day. If so, NC will have about 6 million total votes cast at the low end of that range, which at 76.9% of registered voters would surpass the 2020 turnout record of 72%, which feels a bit unlikely.
Click to expand...
If what Thomas Mills said above is accurate, how is the Black early voting turnout disappointing? It’s 17k more than the turnout from 2020, and that was a year where early turnout was more likely due to the pandemic. I guess I would have to see the numbers from 2016, 2012, and 2008 to get a better understanding.
 
Honestly, the numbers look like a more favorable version of 2020 in NC so far. The gender gap for turnout is about the same and Black voter turnout is lower. I keep hearing the Harris campaign is bullish and Trump campaign is worried, so maybe the issue is not so much the essentially unchanged voter turnout gap by gender but that the actual voting gap of women voters is net larger than it was then b/c so many more women are voting Democratic(?)

Otherwise, I would guess Trump +2-3 absent a surge of blue voters on ED and/or a reversal of GOP dominance on ED now that they are using EV more, so that Dems percentage of the total votes cast improves significantly on ED.

That said, CNN’s most recent poll found Harris with a +6 margin among early voters — if true, the unaffiliated votes must be breaking her way in EV. If that’s true and if GOP early voting diminishes their usual significant lead among Election Day voters by spreading the votes of all parties more evenly across the voting period, then Harris would have a very good shot at picking off NC.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top