Heavy turnout favored GOP. I recall we had people who were poll junkies. What happened?

tequila4kapp said:

---

IIRC Rasmussen was pretty accurate.

The normal answer is Trump voters hide. There's truth in that but I also think pollster's natural bias comes into play. For example, determining what % to include from assorted groups. Also, many of the polls are customers of one side or another. That has to influence independence and accuracy.

---

This is exactly right. There's definitely a ton of wishcasting in many polls.

In addition to Trump voters hiding, I think many just lie due to a "Tom Bradley impact" or just hate for the pollsters/media.

And for pollsters, there's an incentive to show close polls so they won't be "too wrong" on election day.

What we've learned is that it is prevalent enough to impact the real clear politics average and other models that rely on external poll data (such as Nate Silver's) to distort those results as well.

An interesting question is whether this a dynamic is unique to Trump or if it will be a factor going forward (i.e., post 2028).

There is one group of related categories that polls/pollsters ignore …

going4roses said:

---

There is one group of related categories that polls/pollsters ignore …

---

Common decency non-democrats? Just joking folks.

BearGoggles said:

---

An interesting question is whether this a dynamic is unique to Trump or if it will be a factor going forward (i.e., post 2028).

---

it has been very common for polls to overstate the D in Pres elections even before Trump. Exit polls were especially bad.

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

The polls didn't fail. If you looked at any aggregate they had it as a roughly tied race. A candidate winning by between 1-2 points on either side is a perfectly reasonable result, based on the polling we saw. Asking polls to be more accurate than 1 or 2 percentage points is simply unreasonable for what has always been a somewhat inexact science. This was actually a fairly good year for the polls.

---

All the errors were in the same direction, these are not just random errors.

---

No, it's fairly common to have polls miss in the same direction. In the Obama years they tended to undercount his support across the board. A 2-point miss is nothing. They missed by much more in 2016 and 2020, which indicates the pollsters have actually corrected a lot of the issues with polling Trump voters (though again, it will never be perfect).

Queen of polling' J Ann Selzer quits after Iowa survey missed by 16 points.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/17/iowa-pollster-j-ann-selzer-quits



Selzer looks too young to retire but she lost all credibility and had no choice.

bear2034 said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Heavy turnout favored GOP. I recall we had people who were poll junkies. What happened?

---

BREAKING: Here is Kamala’s senior advisor David Plouffe admitting the media polls that had Kamala ahead were all wrong

Their internals never had her winning

Be a shame for the MSM if this went viral

pic.twitter.com/TLzN7TEd8d

— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) November 27, 2024

The Kamala campaign's internal polling never showed them leading during the entire race. The Democrats and media defrauded donors by pretending the race was tighter than it actually was?

---

I suggest you actually listen to the interview, in which they state that their polling had it within a point or two the whole time.

bear2034 said:

---

Queen of polling' J Ann Selzer quits after Iowa survey missed by 16 points.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/17/iowa-pollster-j-ann-selzer-quits



Selzer looks too young to retire but she lost all credibility and had no choice.

---

Selzer is 68 years old and looks much older in current photos than the one you posted. That one must be at least 10-15 years old if not even older than that. She told the Des Moines Register a year ago that she was planning to retire after the 2024 elections, not that it excuses her huge polling miss.

going4roses said:

---

There is one group of related categories that polls/pollsters ignore …

---

BIPOCs? Would you want to go knock on those doors, what with the handguns and pit bulls? Not me.

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

Queen of polling' J Ann Selzer quits after Iowa survey missed by 16 points.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/17/iowa-pollster-j-ann-selzer-quits



Selzer looks too young to retire but she lost all credibility and had no choice.

---

Selzer is 68 years old and looks much older in current photos than the one you posted. That one must be at least 10-15 years old if not even older than that. She told the Des Moines Register a year ago that she was planning to retire after the 2024 elections, not that it excuses her huge polling miss.

---

Yeah, people are reading too much into this one. Selzer had a huge miss in her last big poll (unfortunately), but has mostly been a great pollster for her entire career before that (including showing big Trump leads in 2016 and 2020 that turned out to be correct). She'd already said she was planning on retiring after this year, well before actually doing any 2024 polls.

And anyway, it was just one poll. The majority of polls showed a very tight national race and indeed it was.

wifeisafurd said:

---

Heavy turnout favored GOP. I recall we had people who were poll junkies. What happened?

---

About 5M people fewer voted overall compared to 2020.

sycasey said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Heavy turnout favored GOP. I recall we had people who were poll junkies. What happened?

---

BREAKING: Here is Kamala’s senior advisor David Plouffe admitting the media polls that had Kamala ahead were all wrong

Their internals never had her winning

Be a shame for the MSM if this went viral

pic.twitter.com/TLzN7TEd8d

— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) November 27, 2024

The Kamala campaign's internal polling never showed them leading during the entire race. The Democrats and media defrauded donors by pretending the race was tighter than it actually was?

---

I suggest you actually listen to the interview, in which they state that their polling had it within a point or two the whole time.

---

"The Harris campaign's internal polling apparently never had her ahead of Trump."

👇 pic.twitter.com/iq82an8Ro3

— Mark Mitchell, Rasmussen Reports (@Mark_R_Mitchell) November 27, 2024

Correct, their own internal polling had them a point or two under while the polls themselves had Kamala winning by multiple points in some cases. But suppression polls were considered a conspiracy theory.

bear2034 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Heavy turnout favored GOP. I recall we had people who were poll junkies. What happened?

---

BREAKING: Here is Kamala’s senior advisor David Plouffe admitting the media polls that had Kamala ahead were all wrong

Their internals never had her winning

Be a shame for the MSM if this went viral

pic.twitter.com/TLzN7TEd8d

— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) November 27, 2024

The Kamala campaign's internal polling never showed them leading during the entire race. The Democrats and media defrauded donors by pretending the race was tighter than it actually was?

---

I suggest you actually listen to the interview, in which they state that their polling had it within a point or two the whole time.

---

"The Harris campaign's internal polling apparently never had her ahead of Trump."

👇 pic.twitter.com/iq82an8Ro3

— Mark Mitchell, Rasmussen Reports (@Mark_R_Mitchell) November 27, 2024

Correct, their own internal polling had them a point or two under while the polls themselves had Kamala winning by multiple points in some cases. But suppression polls were considered a conspiracy theory.

---

If you averaged out those polls you still would probably get something like Kamala +2, which is not wildly different from her trailing by 1. The polls just showed a tight race, that's it.

sycasey said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Heavy turnout favored GOP. I recall we had people who were poll junkies. What happened?

---

BREAKING: Here is Kamala’s senior advisor David Plouffe admitting the media polls that had Kamala ahead were all wrong

Their internals never had her winning

Be a shame for the MSM if this went viral

pic.twitter.com/TLzN7TEd8d

— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) November 27, 2024

The Kamala campaign's internal polling never showed them leading during the entire race. The Democrats and media defrauded donors by pretending the race was tighter than it actually was?

---

I suggest you actually listen to the interview, in which they state that their polling had it within a point or two the whole time.

---

"The Harris campaign's internal polling apparently never had her ahead of Trump."

👇 pic.twitter.com/iq82an8Ro3

— Mark Mitchell, Rasmussen Reports (@Mark_R_Mitchell) November 27, 2024

Correct, their own internal polling had them a point or two under while the polls themselves had Kamala winning by multiple points in some cases. But suppression polls were considered a conspiracy theory.

---

If you averaged out those polls you still would probably get something like Kamala +2, which is not wildly different from her trailing by 1. The polls just showed a tight race, that's it.

---

If you averaged out those polls that had Trump winning, they were off by one point. Most of the polls that had Kamala winning were off by 4 or more points.

bear2034 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Heavy turnout favored GOP. I recall we had people who were poll junkies. What happened?

---

BREAKING: Here is Kamala’s senior advisor David Plouffe admitting the media polls that had Kamala ahead were all wrong

Their internals never had her winning

Be a shame for the MSM if this went viral

pic.twitter.com/TLzN7TEd8d

— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) November 27, 2024

The Kamala campaign's internal polling never showed them leading during the entire race. The Democrats and media defrauded donors by pretending the race was tighter than it actually was?

---

I suggest you actually listen to the interview, in which they state that their polling had it within a point or two the whole time.

---

"The Harris campaign's internal polling apparently never had her ahead of Trump."

👇 pic.twitter.com/iq82an8Ro3

— Mark Mitchell, Rasmussen Reports (@Mark_R_Mitchell) November 27, 2024

Correct, their own internal polling had them a point or two under while the polls themselves had Kamala winning by multiple points in some cases. But suppression polls were considered a conspiracy theory.

---

If you averaged out those polls you still would probably get something like Kamala +2, which is not wildly different from her trailing by 1. The polls just showed a tight race, that's it.

---

If you averaged out those polls that had Trump winning, they were off by one point. Most of the polls that had Kamala winning were off by 4 or more points.

---

And this is why we take an average.

wifeisafurd said:

---

Heavy turnout favored GOP. I recall we had people who were poll junkies. What happened?

---

The polls were spot on. See Atlas Intel and RCP.