Polling by right-leaning firms has exploded this cycle. Maybe they want to be accurate—or maybe they’re trying to create a sense of momentum for Donald Trump.
I think we might actually agree more than you imagine - I also think Harris is doing pretty damn amazing right now, and I also think it looks good for her.
I’m not suggesting the forecasts for things like the amendments were correct, they definitely missed, and hard. I’m saying they were wrong because they took in a lot of clearly biased inputs.
There were other polls that actually had a lot of this data in them, and showed a clear lean in the odds post-Roe. However, these polls were being weighted by aggregators against stuff like Rasmussen, and Trafalgar, which are absolute trash. The forecasters were applying weights they themselves invented to these polls and including the trash data, meaning it was trash data AND it was deliberately turned into something that biased the sample set towards a middle average.
What I’m saying is that cutting that chaff out of the results, and then being realistic about what a “+2 margin” means (it’s actually pretty good) results in a wholly different picture than the aggregators are giving us. One where Harris is more or less the clear pick.
Anyway, having said all that - it really, really does come down to turnout on this one. Trump’s base doesn’t really falter, and it’s around 65m votes every time. That can get flooded out but not without people showing up.
I think we might actually agree more than you imagine - I also think Harris is doing pretty damn amazing right now, and I also think it looks good for her.
I’m not suggesting the forecasts for things like the amendments were correct, they definitely missed, and hard. I’m saying they were wrong because they took in a lot of clearly biased inputs.
There were other polls that actually had a lot of this data in them, and showed a clear lean in the odds post-Roe. However, these polls were being weighted by aggregators against stuff like Rasmussen, and Trafalgar, which are absolute trash. The forecasters were applying weights they themselves invented to these polls and including the trash data, meaning it was trash data AND it was deliberately turned into something that biased the sample set towards a middle average.
What I’m saying is that cutting that chaff out of the results, and then being realistic about what a “+2 margin” means (it’s actually pretty good) results in a wholly different picture than the aggregators are giving us. One where Harris is more or less the clear pick.
Anyway, having said all that - it really, really does come down to turnout on this one. Trump’s base doesn’t really falter, and it’s around 65m votes every time. That can get flooded out but not without people showing up.
It’s going to skew way harder for Harris than +2. Sit tight.