Why the Polling Is Both Right and Wrong

Today’s notice: Polling is infuriating, congressional leadership is equivocating, Jon Tester is still missing three fingers.

There is a chart a lot of people I talk to these days are obsessed with. It’s that one that compares current polling to the polling errors of 2020 and 2022. If the polls were as wrong as they were in ’20, Donald Trump wins easily. If they’re as wrong as they were in 2022, Kamala Harris cruises to victory. If the polls are absolutely right, the race is basically a coin flip. But they’re probably not absolutely right, which means anything could happen. Got it?

While my first impulse upon hearing all of this was to fly to a deserted island and not return until well after the election, I instead took one more chance on civilization and asked experienced folks for their working hypothesis of what the polls are wrong about this time.

Kyle Kondik of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics said he’s keeping a skeptical eye on the divide between Senate and presidential numbers in states. “There may ultimately be less ticket splitting than a number of polls suggest, which probably gives the Republicans a higher ceiling in the Senate than may be generally recognized,” he emailed. “I say that as someone who still thinks the Democrats have at least a slight edge in the battleground state Senate races, AZ-MI-NV-PA-WI.” (More on ticket splitting below.)

Pollster Jim Hobart told me it’s the polling analysis that could end up very wrong. “I think the assumption is because the polls are currently so close, that we are headed to an outcome like 2020 where a winner is not fully declared until Saturday after the election,” he emailed. “That is certainly one possible outcome, but the more likely outcome is the majority of the swing states breaking in the same direction, and the winner being declared on Election Night, or maybe the next day.”

Now we’re getting somewhere. Or are we? “The part no one can be totally sure of is in which way the swing states are all going to break!” Hobart added.

Drew Linzer, who used to forecast elections (“a very humbling experience”) and now just polls them at Civiqs, talked to me at length about polling industry practice, his own efforts to constantly create the most accurate model and the idea of “embracing the uncertainty” of polling that is baked in. He had a simple answer when I asked if he had any idea what polls might miss this year.

“If I knew that, I would be putting it into my polls,” he said, “and they wouldn’t be missing.”

Dave “I’ve Seen Enough” Wasserman reminded me that the polls in 2022 were not that far off in the end. The struggles in crafting those polls, including a dismal response rate, persist this year. Yet there are things to read in all the data that could provide insight into how the polls will look after the election is over.

“The big fear on Democrats’ part, and I think it’s a valid fear, is that Harris won’t match her support in polls among white, non-college-educated voters,” he said. “It’s possible that Trump might over-perform with these people.” Why? “Because it’s happened twice before,” he said.

The big questions for Wasserman: Will undecided and third-party voters show up at all, and if so, will they vote on only the economy? Or will they decide Trump is too extreme? Or will it be a little of both? Trump’s base has been bigger in reality than in polling samples when he’s run before.

“The truth is we’re all in the dark,” he said.

The island is looking better and better.

—Evan McMorris-Santoro

Milton Approaches, Congress Hunkers Down

Speaker Mike Johnson has resisted calls to bring Congress back into session and deal with emergency spending (he argued it was going to take some time to calculate the damage anyway, and there wasn’t a need to rush back). Democrats and even some prominent Republicans are suggesting it might be worth pausing the campaign season recess. Others simply do not see the point.

“Bureaucrats always will take advantage of people’s emotions on things like this to get more power and to get more money,” Rep. Tim Burchett told NOTUS’ Haley Byrd Wilt. He said FEMA’s efforts haven’t been rapid enough and local and state governments are more efficient. FEMA said government assistance for survivors of the storm has surpassed $210 million and nearly 7,000 personnel from the federal workforce are responding.

Burchett didn’t give in to online conspiracy theories — pushed by GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene — that Biden’s administration is actively scheming to hurt red areas in the hurricane response, but he insisted passing the aid wasn’t something Congress would normally do in a hurry.

Meanwhile, Rep. Chuck Edwards, who represents some of the hardest hit areas in North Carolina, put out a fact-check to “dispel the outrageous rumors” about FEMA’s response, starting with “Hurricane Helene was NOT geoengineered by the government to seize and access lithium deposits in Chimney Rock” and “Nobody can control the weather.”

Read more here.

Front Page

• Republicans Know They Won’t ‘Turn Detroit Ruby Red.’ But They See an Opportunity With Black Voters in Michigan: “We don’t need to pick up a ton of points,” GOP Rep. Lisa McClain told NOTUS. “We just need to pick up some.”
• FEMA Resources Hang in the Balance as Hurricane Season Intensifies: With Hurricane Milton expected to make landfall, demand for federal aid may push the agency to its limits.
• How Far Does ‘Authenticity’ Go in Trump Country?: Democrats are testing the limits of ticket splitting in Montana.
• Pressure Is Mounting for Congress to Return and Pass Disaster Aid: Speaker Mike Johnson says lawmakers will not come back until after the election.

Jon Tester Is REALLY, REALLY From Montana. Do Montanans Care?

If you pay attention to politics at all, you probably know Montana Sen. Jon Tester is a multigenerational dirt farmer with seven fingers (the other three were lost long ago in a meat-grinding incident). This bio has historically helped Tester appeal to rural independents and Republicans willing to split a ticket for a guy they can relate to.

But Montana is changing, NOTUS’ Casey Murray reports, and Democrats are finding they can’t just rely on existing ticket splitters like they used to. (We’ve previously reported that this is a trend in other tough Senate races, like Wisconsin.) Conventional wisdom says a Democrat in Montana needs to win about one in five Republicans.

“Montana is known for splitting tickets. I’ve never voted for a straight ticket in my life,” Tester told Casey. “A lot of Montanans vote for the person, not for the party, and I think that’s the best way to have it. Now, obviously [Republican] Tim Sheehy, being from Minnesota, doesn’t know that.”

Read more here.

Number You Should Know

$175 billion

That’s how much devastation Hurricane Milton could cause in Florida, Wall Street analysts estimated, per CNBC.

Not Us

We know NOTUS reporters can’t cover it all. Here’s some other great hits by … not us.

• Silicon Valley is pouring millions into super PACs that intimidate politicians into supporting its agenda, a New Yorker investigation finds.
• The 19th News explores how caregivers and single moms have been left out of the political discourse.
• Speaking of which, everyone is missing the “state college voter.” Politico explores the underexplored demographic.

Be Social

Our Capitol Hill bureau chief has declared that it is, in fact, decorative gourd season.

Tell Us Your Thoughts

Send your thoughts to newsletters@notus.org.