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: 5K
  • Views: 184K
  • Politics 
Gift Link —> A Florida Poll That Should Change the Way You Look at the Election


A Florida Poll That Should Change the Way You Look at the Election​


A big Trump lead in the state paradoxically adds to evidence of a smaller Electoral College edge for him. And a choice by pollsters may cause them to miss state shifts.

“…
Our first Texas poll of the cycle also looks “normal.” Donald J. Trump leads by six points, 50 percent to 44 percent, another tally that’s right in line with the polling average and close to the 2020 result.

And then there’s Florida.

Our first poll of the state this cycle finds Mr. Trump ahead by a staggering 13 points, 55 percent to 41 percent (again, rounded figures). This looks nothing like the other polls of the state. Heading into today, Mr. Trump led Florida in the Times average of all polls by just four points. None of the 11 polls fielded in September or October put him ahead by more than six points.


What’s telling, though, is that the basic political pattern from the midterms still seems evident in the polling today. If the poll is right, Florida really has gone on a different path from Pennsylvania and Michigan. And since the paths diverged several years ago, the most straightforward explanation is that the fights over the pandemic, “woke,” abortion rights, crime, Mr. Trump’s effort to overturn the election and so on left a lasting mark on the electoral map.

Importantly, the pattern is consistent with the idea that Mr. Trump’s edge in the Electoral College has shrunk somewhat since 2020.

A 10-point gain for Mr. Trump in Florida and New York (where Siena College also showsenduring Republican strength, though the state remains safely Democratic) would be enough to shave about a point off Vice President Harris’s lead in the popular vote.

… the Florida poll reveals an entirely separate problem: What happens if the makeup of the electorate changes?

Over the last four years, Florida’s party registration has shifted significantly, going from D+ 0.7 to R+ 7.5. According to L2, a nonpartisan political data vendor, people who moved to Florida since January 2021 have registered as Republicans by a margin of more than two to one, 49 percent to 22 percent. The broader group of new registrants, which includes young people who probably didn’t vote in the last election, registered Republican by a smaller but still significant margin, 39 percent to 22 percent.

The bottom line: This is probably not a Trump +3 electorate anymore, even if the recall vote measure itself was accurate. That doesn’t mean the Times/Siena poll is “right” — it’s an inherently imprecise measurement — but it does make it harder to discount it based on the other polls.

In the past, almost every poll would have had a chance to capture this kind of shift. In fact, that’s the whole point of polling. Now, many polls are designed to ensure they don’t show it at all. …”
Tl;dr all the crazies have moved to FL
 

Independent candidate Dan Osborne up 5 on incumbent Republican Deb Fischer in Nebraska according to new poll.
I keep seeing polls where he's ahead. I guess the question is if he does win will he caucus with Senate Democrats or Senate Republicans? Because if he simply sides with the Republicans and votes with them the vast majority of the time I don't see how that helps Democrats any. Will he be an improvement over Fischer, or just a consistent GOP-voting independent?
 
FFS, the pollsters are just working for Prozac ...



 
Last edited:
I think that the big difference in a lot of polls these days (excluding the red polls that are intentionally biased) is that modeling turnout has gotten much, much tougher than it used to be.

It's hard to get people to respond, but if you try hard enough you can weight by demographics to counter that issue. But uncertainty in turnout means that different polls will create different models and my hunch is that the different turnout models/assumptions are to blame for the majority of the differences we see in (unbiased) polling.
According to Nate Cohn of the NYT, the biggest systematic difference between polls is that some of them are weighting on the basis of recalled 2020 vote and some are not. The ones weighting on the former basis are showing a larger national lead for Kamala but smaller state leads. In other words, recalled 2020 vote weights are making this election look more like the last one, whereas the polls not weighting in that fashion are showing a smaller national lead for Kamala but better swing state performance.

Methodologically, weighting on the basis of recalled vote is bad. It just is. That's why it hasn't been used for a long time. It's being pulled out this year because 1) the assumption that the 2024 election is going to more resemble the 2020 election than perhaps any other pair of elections in recent history; and 2) they've got to find some way of reaching the Trumpers. It's a kludge. We will find out if it's a useful one, but in theory it should be worse for a number of reasons.

I suspect that the use of recalled vote weighting will be overkill. In 2016 there was concern over the "shy Trump voter." Well, those voters aren't so shy any more. Maybe there still are some quiet ones who don't go to rally or put up signs or post BSC craziness to social media, and who would also be reluctant to admit to another person that they are Trumpers. It's also possible that the Trump voters, distrustful as they are, are still harder to reach than other voters, but I'm skeptical. I think Trump voters now pay more attention to polls than they did before, in part because Trump has made "being up in the polls" such a central part of his victimization campaign that people are eager to boost his poll numbers. So recalled vote is a correction to a problem that might not exist.
 
If anyone actually believes that Trump has a 13-point lead in Florida then I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell them. There's no way that Trump just suddenly gained 5 to 10 points in the polls there. Just more evidence that the polling on this election is all over the place and thus deep skepticism is justified. Trump will likely win Florida, but he's not going to win it by 13 points, or even close to that amount. In 2016 he won it by 1.3% and in 2020 by 3.4%.
Nate Cohn acknowledged that 13 was probably an outlier, but he thinks 4 is ridiculously low. Trump is probably going to win Florida by 7-8 points, I suspect.

And that's good news for Kamala. Remember: every vote cast in excess of 50%+1 is wasted. If Trump is down nationally by 2.5 but is up by 8 in Florida, then he must be doing worse somewhere else. He's also doing better than he was in CA and NY. Again, these are positive developments. So when we see national polls of Kamala +2 and PA polls of Kamala +2 -- well, those are often interpreted to be inconsistent. After all, isn't PA to the right of the U.S.? It has been. But if Trump is up 8 in Florida and only down 8 in CA, then maybe PA is no longer to the right of the US.
 
Tl;dr all the crazies have moved to FL
That's one of the effects, but it's not necessarily crazies. The demographic most supportive of Trump is white men 55+. Well, who are the people who retire to Florida? Crazy or not, the migration is going to end up funneling Trump support to Florida.
 
That's one of the effects, but it's not necessarily crazies. The demographic most supportive of Trump is white men 55+. Well, who are the people who retire to Florida? Crazy or not, the migration is going to end up funneling Trump support to Florida.
FLA has been a lost cause.
 
Back
Top