Let's go back to November of 2020. You're one of the 81 million people who voted for Biden. Then you watched Trump lead an insurrection and try to steal the election. He now faces 91 indictments. What possible issue could make you want to vote for Trump now? I feel like I'm living in bizarro world.
I think there are two things here, one is people have actually forgotten how crazy he is, and will be reminded (soon) when he's front and center more often. The average American doesn't read stuff like this, or follow it closely. Second is the double haters, like Haley voters who say they will not vote for Trump. Do not sleep on that number, it's high. I think even if those voters split 50/50 for Trump/Biden in key swing states, it will be enough to carry Biden over the line. Even if they don't all vote for Biden, skipping the race or writing in someone else benefits Biden in the end.
Chris: OK, I tried because I liked some of your previous work. Now, I have to tell you that I’m cancelling my paid subscription to So What for the simple reason that you are not providing the kind of deep dive and accurate reporting I expected. To view the latest NYT polls as valid and accurate is incorrect and shows no real effort, or ability, to understand polling. I wish you well, but I need good quality reporting, not off the cuff nonsense. What were you thinking?
That is just not TRUE Chris . You have always tailored your work and analysis to make Trump's cult members happy. Qhich is fine as you have the right to do so but please own up to it.I have known this for a long time and as long as I subscribe to your Newsletter I will continue to call you out on it
That is utterly ridiculous, Dr. You have a viewpoint! Which is fine. But not everyone shares that view in the country. You don't seem to grasp that! Or want to!
We can't generalize the opinions of some 800 to 900 people to the 150 million voting population. Just can't because it does not make any common or statiscal sense at all
I agree Mike. I'm a democrat and I think Biden's age is a huge problem. Will I vote for him? 100% because Trump's problems are far, far worse. Biden has surrounded himself with competent advisors and cabinet members and I think Kamala Harris would perform quite well if need be. If you aren't worried that Biden will have a "Mitch McConnell" moment at some meeting of world leaders, you aren't paying attention. I also don't see how the "X craziest lines from Trump's latest speech/rally/town hall" posts are aimed at making Trump's cult members happy - they are literally using Trumps own words to show just how off the rails the man is.
Your view is utterly inconsistent with objective reality. Chris often writes scathing assessments of Trump's words and deeds. Do you read his reviews of Trump's speeches and interviews , which are filled with critical comments and call out Trump's lies? You and some other folks inveigh whenever someone offers facts or opinions contrary to yours. There are plenty of outlets that cater to such preferences and will make you happy all the time. They are not worth my time.
How about carefully crafting your work to support its validity with facts and insight? That requires some knowledge of statistics and a broader view. A bridge too far? I like you, Chris, but you attribute to me motives that are not mine. I have dug into this. I suggest that you rethink the whole article.
Your comments, Chris, and this matter in general, require more studied and lengthy responses than I can craft today. Here’s the best I have off the cuff: I do have some background in statistics and in study design. (I’m 77, so that’s years behind me, but I still can find my way home, so maybe I recall some of it.) In an era when newsrooms and the companies that craft polls are hurried, under staffed, and under funded, there are many errors that can creep into polling, especially in a time when clicks are so valuable. Sensationalism be us right now.
Sometimes, finding the errors in polling takes a great deal of time and expertise and nothing is obvious. At other times, the errors scream out. NYT has pushed out polls that clearly have methodological flaws. I have to go cook my porridge, and really cannot delve into that too deeply. It is the obligation of those who report on the polls to perform due diligence so they know they aren’t selling scrambled statistics that really have no meaning. And, yet, scrambled stats are what we’re getting from NYT.
One part off this to which I’m sensitive is that you did attribute certain motives to me. I will not do that to you. My critiques is of method, not motive. Please let’s keep those separate. I do believe you are a good person who is trying to survive and thrive in a difficult environment and I wish you the best. I suggest you dig deeper on the whole polling issue if you want to provide better informed reporting.
Damn! I didn’t really mean to get this deep into anything before breakfast! (I live in Alaska, so I’m four hours earlier than east coasters.)
The polls may be inaccurate, or they may be right on(doubtful) but it is the business of journalists to let us know what they see, hear, and interpret about the data. If we don’t like what we hear, we still have time to change the calculus. We shouldn ‘t shoot the messenger, though. These polls are actual numbers being disseminated by the mainstream press. It does us no good to live in a bubble and ignore the hoofbeats of potential problems.
You’re right, Cathryn, in that we shouldn’t ignore. Those of us who understand some of the intricacies of polling must push back hard when their process is flawed, as this one clearly was. (The errors are so obvious and egregious that I believe them to be intentional.) A journalist is obliged to dig deep and understand a matter thoroughly, not just to repeat credulously what is shoveled out to him. Someone with a dilettante’s understanding of polls should leave reporting about polls to experts. Every time we see a poll we should inquire about a number of factors: Who commissioned the poll? Who conducted it? What stake do they have in the outcome? What was their methodology, their sample size, the margin of error. What special “normalization” was done, and why. Those who know polling well understand that pollsters can get whatever outcome they want, and that they have a huge obligation to demonstrate why their poll is valid. These days, pollsters often shoot out crappy polls to confuse and to flood the field with shit. Republicans actually are doing this regularly. Reporters and consumers must become more expert at vetting polls. This particular poll just isn’t valid on its face.
Well, I think that here, Chris has simply taken the numbers as reported and commented about what they might mean. Each of us can decide how accurate we think those numbers are, but some prognostication based on the numbers is not a bad thing. We all know that poll numbers can be extremely misleading…..but they’re the numbers that we have.not many of us have ever been quizzed by a pollster…I don’t use a land line and I never answer calls from unknown numbers. The folks they talk to are a skewed population, so we have to take any of their results with a grain of salt. The real proof will be the election. My hope is that these numbers go the way of the “red wave”.
I agree. Polls will always be skewed, based on who is willing to answer their phone and become involved. I don't own a landline either, and I never answer calls from unknown numbers. Also, all I really got out of this article from Chris is that he was reporting the data that was noted in the polls. I don't read any hidden agenda in there.
He Chris also failed to highlight the most important conclusion of that poll. That's about the so called "Double Haters" They overwhelmingly break for Biden. But he conveniently ommitted that important conclusion and yet he(Chris) claimed he's objective and non partisan. CommonMan!
I'm waiting for the poll once Biden is officially the candidate. All these polls are wishful thinking. Yes, I too think Biden is old, but Trump is old. I honestly think Trump is on his pathway to dementia like his dad. His word salads are getting worse and just went long riff on how Obama is president. Once it is final candidates, everyone who knows Trump should not be president will stand alongside Biden. This is the fate underway. Hang tight for the rollercoaster ride!
I understand that Chris feel strongly about his analysis. However, I think he continues to push the Biden/old narrative which is misleading.
With regards to the NYT poll, I think he isn’t looking at the right information. Don’t lose sleep over Chris’ inaccurate take and the NYT poll. I would recommend people look for Jay Kuo’s breakdown on this poll that delves into why this poll doesn’t reflect reality (women numbers are skewed, as well as Dean Phillips’ support, young people vote, Latino vote is skewed, etc).
I wish Chris would stop pushing Biden’s age as a bigger problem to democracy than Trump’s incompetency and authoritarian desires. If Trump were ever to become president again (god forbid) he would take charge of the media and press and sources that would be critical of Trump, like Chris has been some time, would be shut down.
I would hope that Chris would start pushing a different narrative and the danger to our country that Trump represents rather than Biden’s age being the issue. By doing this he is assisting sending our country into a dictatorship. You only have to compare the two presidencies to know who is a better leader for this country.
He doesn't have to push any Narrative. Biden doesn't need him to win. He should just be objective and independent as he promised to do but has not being doing.
The media/pollsters/commentators all seem committed to the "Biden is too old" narrative — as you clearly are, Chris. Why aren't there any polls that ask, "Is Donald Trump too corrupt to be president?"
I understand. But Chris is doubling down on the media's favorite frame for the election — "Biden is too old." (He flogs the issue at least weekly in here.) That whole frame seems designed to make the election about a side issue — Biden's age — and to make sure all voters view the election that way. A disservice to democracy.
Nope. Voters FEEL that way. Look at EVERY poll. Suggesting this is some media creation is simply false. The media doesn't have anywhere near that much power!
I'm not doubting there's some voter sentiment that way. It would be unnatural if there was not evidence, given the drumbeat of "Biden is too old" that media outlets (and you) have been hammering for months.
Chris, I am tasking you to challenge the media to ask this equally-subjective question: "Is Donald Trump too corrupt to be president?" Then we can untangle the cross tabs on that one.
The key data elements are against Biden, but in no poll have I read questions related to the neutering of the Justice Department, the prison camps for migrants, the fealty to Putin, and suspension of our constitution. Ask voters about those things and I’m quite sure passions will emerge. Biden may be boring and old, but he is not a rapist, fraud, or insurrectionist. In short: the polls need to re-focus on what Trump will do and ask if voters still would vote for him.
OBTW where’s Melania? I’ll bet she’s gone from his orbit.
This is NOT good news for Biden. But how many times has he been counted out as finished and beyond hope and yet bounced back? Not to be Pollyanna-ish about it, but I think Thursday night's State of the Union will amount to the actual start of the campaign. Let's see where we are a week or so from now.
Although this poll has some worrying trends, and Sienna may have a decent track record, polls this early are notoriously not predictive of an election that is 8 months away.
When you look at the methodology you see this….
“980 registered voters nationwide, including 823 who completed the full survey,”. Many of the answers are from the 823 who stayed around for all the questions.
In 2020 there were over 155 MILLION votes cast for the two main candidates.
The breakdown of self-identifiers dilutes the numbers even more…
49% Republican Party (or lean Republican)
43% Democratic Party (or lean Democratic)
When asked “What single news source do you turn to most often”
Of the 19% that volunteered a cable news source, 52% said Fox.
10% - Fox
7% CNN
2% MSNBC
Another 4% volunteered…”conservative news site” or Newsmax.
A frightening 17% volunteered “Social Media”. Conservatives dominate “social media”
What is really disconcerting and why relying on one poll to make sweeping assumptions of what is going to happen in November is fact that 12% of the respondents self-identified as “Black” or only 98 people.
There are 35 MILLION Black people over the age of 18 in America today. And we are supposed to obsess over 98 people’s opinions?!?!?
Even more ridiculous is that of those 98 Blacks, only 66% said they were going to vote for Joe Biden and a whopping 23% for Trump.
If anyone believes that Trump will get 23% of the Black vote, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
After Labor Day when the majority of voters really start paying attention to the election, the reality of the stark choice between serial criminal, sex abuser, fraudster and sociopathic liar and con-man Donald Trump and old but effective Joe Biden will make relaying on polls like this look foolish
THANKS DAVE!!! FOR DIGGING INTO THE SO CALLED GOLD STANDARD POLL. THE SAMPLE SIZE IS SO SMALL, THE DEMOGRAPHICS OF THE SMALL SAMPLE ANALYZED IS VERY SKEWED. ANYONE WHO UNDERSTANDS BASIC STATISTICS WOULD NOT PAY A PENNY FOR THAT NYT POLLS. PERIOD!!!. STOP BEING EXCITED (BIDEN'S HATRRS)
Here’s the thing….polling has been wildly incorrect over the last few cycles, and if it comes down to Trump vs Biden, fear alone will drive Americans who are whinging about Biden to vote for him anyway. I did that myself in 2020 He was my third choice, but the prospect of a second Trump administration lit a fire under my behind to get to the polls and keep Donald J Trump far, far away from the Resolute desk. Biden is old, Biden seems more frail, Biden is sharp, passionate, and committed to democracy, and Biden is not Trump. Prognosticators may prognosticate, Americans are not going to hand their nation to a racist, xenophobic,homophobic, misogynistic,anti-semitic, cognitvely impaired criminal.. That said, publishing these items as Chris has done here only helps voters to realize that they must be involved and aware, and vote, vote, vote
What concerns me more than anything, Chris, is that you simply take the NYT/Siena poll at face value without looking at the CLEAR discrepancies in the crosstabs. No, I don’t like the results, but that has NOTHING to do with my complaint. I look to you for thoughtful and accurate analysis, but you seriously dropped the ball on this!
I’ve read 4 or 5 excellent analyses (Jay Kuo of The Status Kuo has one of the best), and you’ve missed the serious issues. Sure, generally speaking, the NYT/Siena polls have been better quality than most, but this one is an embarrassment.
Here’s just a smattering of the comments I’ve read that you totally blew by:
Only 980 people were contacted. That’s an extremely small sample, based upon 155M voting in 2020.
Over 80% of Hispanic voters were interviewed in English and not Spanish, which is completely non-representative. Even Televisa pointed that out this week!
The poll over-represents rural voters. In the 2020 election, they were 19%. In this poll, they’re 36%.
Biden won women by 11% in 2020 and that was BEFORE the Dobbs decision. This poll has Trump up by 1%. In what possible world, given how completely motivating the Dobbs decision has been in EVERY election held since it struck down Roe v Wade, does Trump win with women?!? Elections are far more representative than polls and this one alone makes the results HIGHLY unreliable.
The poll says virtually ALL Trump 2020 voters will vote for him again. How does that fare with the Republican primaries, where 30% to 40% voted for non-Trump candidates, and 43% of Haley voters said they would vote for Biden in a head-to-head battle? Sure, there were, in some states, independents that could crossover and vote in the Republican primary and may have skewed it somewhat, but not by THAT large an amount!
Speaking of independents, the poll says Biden will win them by 4%. And voters that dislike BOTH Trump and Biden say they will vote by a 12% margin for Biden. And the poll says that Trump will win by 5%?!
Millennials prefer Trump by a margin 13% HIGHER than Baby Boomers?! Have they ever talked to a millennial?!
These are just a few points that other writers on Substack have made over the last few days, prior to this article of yours, and the lack of analytical detail on the methodology of this flawed poll in your article is extremely disappointing, Chris. I would hope you do better next time.
Chris in the chart you showed with polls, you conveniently ommitted the Quinnipiac poll that showed Biden beating Trump by 4 points. Is it because that didn't fit into your narrative ?
As Biden continues sliding in the polls, and his mobility and speech continue to show decline, how does it make sense to say that JB WILL BE THE CANDIDATE? Sure, if he kills it at tha SOTU, and then hits the campaign trail running...well, jogging..kinda...life could be good again. Go Joe! But if Biden continues to bumble through the speech and the immediate aftermath he MUST step aside. There is too much at stake to let stubbornness and tradition take us over the abyss.
Let's go back to November of 2020. You're one of the 81 million people who voted for Biden. Then you watched Trump lead an insurrection and try to steal the election. He now faces 91 indictments. What possible issue could make you want to vote for Trump now? I feel like I'm living in bizarro world.
I think there are two things here, one is people have actually forgotten how crazy he is, and will be reminded (soon) when he's front and center more often. The average American doesn't read stuff like this, or follow it closely. Second is the double haters, like Haley voters who say they will not vote for Trump. Do not sleep on that number, it's high. I think even if those voters split 50/50 for Trump/Biden in key swing states, it will be enough to carry Biden over the line. Even if they don't all vote for Biden, skipping the race or writing in someone else benefits Biden in the end.
Chris: OK, I tried because I liked some of your previous work. Now, I have to tell you that I’m cancelling my paid subscription to So What for the simple reason that you are not providing the kind of deep dive and accurate reporting I expected. To view the latest NYT polls as valid and accurate is incorrect and shows no real effort, or ability, to understand polling. I wish you well, but I need good quality reporting, not off the cuff nonsense. What were you thinking?
You disagree with the conclusions -- because they go against what you want to believe -- and therefore are invalid.
I am sorry to lose you as a subscriber, truly. But I won't cater my work to make partisans happy,
Thanks much.
Chris
That is just not TRUE Chris . You have always tailored your work and analysis to make Trump's cult members happy. Qhich is fine as you have the right to do so but please own up to it.I have known this for a long time and as long as I subscribe to your Newsletter I will continue to call you out on it
I respectfully disagree - it feels like you may be shooting the messenger, when you disagree with the message...
That is utterly ridiculous, Dr. You have a viewpoint! Which is fine. But not everyone shares that view in the country. You don't seem to grasp that! Or want to!
We can't generalize the opinions of some 800 to 900 people to the 150 million voting population. Just can't because it does not make any common or statiscal sense at all
I agree Mike. I'm a democrat and I think Biden's age is a huge problem. Will I vote for him? 100% because Trump's problems are far, far worse. Biden has surrounded himself with competent advisors and cabinet members and I think Kamala Harris would perform quite well if need be. If you aren't worried that Biden will have a "Mitch McConnell" moment at some meeting of world leaders, you aren't paying attention. I also don't see how the "X craziest lines from Trump's latest speech/rally/town hall" posts are aimed at making Trump's cult members happy - they are literally using Trumps own words to show just how off the rails the man is.
Agreed!
Your view is utterly inconsistent with objective reality. Chris often writes scathing assessments of Trump's words and deeds. Do you read his reviews of Trump's speeches and interviews , which are filled with critical comments and call out Trump's lies? You and some other folks inveigh whenever someone offers facts or opinions contrary to yours. There are plenty of outlets that cater to such preferences and will make you happy all the time. They are not worth my time.
How about carefully crafting your work to support its validity with facts and insight? That requires some knowledge of statistics and a broader view. A bridge too far? I like you, Chris, but you attribute to me motives that are not mine. I have dug into this. I suggest that you rethink the whole article.
I fundamentally disagree? Are you suggesting that the NYT made up the data? Or that the NYT is somehow in the bag from Trump?
Your comments, Chris, and this matter in general, require more studied and lengthy responses than I can craft today. Here’s the best I have off the cuff: I do have some background in statistics and in study design. (I’m 77, so that’s years behind me, but I still can find my way home, so maybe I recall some of it.) In an era when newsrooms and the companies that craft polls are hurried, under staffed, and under funded, there are many errors that can creep into polling, especially in a time when clicks are so valuable. Sensationalism be us right now.
Sometimes, finding the errors in polling takes a great deal of time and expertise and nothing is obvious. At other times, the errors scream out. NYT has pushed out polls that clearly have methodological flaws. I have to go cook my porridge, and really cannot delve into that too deeply. It is the obligation of those who report on the polls to perform due diligence so they know they aren’t selling scrambled statistics that really have no meaning. And, yet, scrambled stats are what we’re getting from NYT.
One part off this to which I’m sensitive is that you did attribute certain motives to me. I will not do that to you. My critiques is of method, not motive. Please let’s keep those separate. I do believe you are a good person who is trying to survive and thrive in a difficult environment and I wish you the best. I suggest you dig deeper on the whole polling issue if you want to provide better informed reporting.
Damn! I didn’t really mean to get this deep into anything before breakfast! (I live in Alaska, so I’m four hours earlier than east coasters.)
The polls may be inaccurate, or they may be right on(doubtful) but it is the business of journalists to let us know what they see, hear, and interpret about the data. If we don’t like what we hear, we still have time to change the calculus. We shouldn ‘t shoot the messenger, though. These polls are actual numbers being disseminated by the mainstream press. It does us no good to live in a bubble and ignore the hoofbeats of potential problems.
You’re right, Cathryn, in that we shouldn’t ignore. Those of us who understand some of the intricacies of polling must push back hard when their process is flawed, as this one clearly was. (The errors are so obvious and egregious that I believe them to be intentional.) A journalist is obliged to dig deep and understand a matter thoroughly, not just to repeat credulously what is shoveled out to him. Someone with a dilettante’s understanding of polls should leave reporting about polls to experts. Every time we see a poll we should inquire about a number of factors: Who commissioned the poll? Who conducted it? What stake do they have in the outcome? What was their methodology, their sample size, the margin of error. What special “normalization” was done, and why. Those who know polling well understand that pollsters can get whatever outcome they want, and that they have a huge obligation to demonstrate why their poll is valid. These days, pollsters often shoot out crappy polls to confuse and to flood the field with shit. Republicans actually are doing this regularly. Reporters and consumers must become more expert at vetting polls. This particular poll just isn’t valid on its face.
The messenger should report the message accurately and not use the message to further his own agenda just because he has a Newsletter
Well, I think that here, Chris has simply taken the numbers as reported and commented about what they might mean. Each of us can decide how accurate we think those numbers are, but some prognostication based on the numbers is not a bad thing. We all know that poll numbers can be extremely misleading…..but they’re the numbers that we have.not many of us have ever been quizzed by a pollster…I don’t use a land line and I never answer calls from unknown numbers. The folks they talk to are a skewed population, so we have to take any of their results with a grain of salt. The real proof will be the election. My hope is that these numbers go the way of the “red wave”.
I agree. Polls will always be skewed, based on who is willing to answer their phone and become involved. I don't own a landline either, and I never answer calls from unknown numbers. Also, all I really got out of this article from Chris is that he was reporting the data that was noted in the polls. I don't read any hidden agenda in there.
He Chris also failed to highlight the most important conclusion of that poll. That's about the so called "Double Haters" They overwhelmingly break for Biden. But he conveniently ommitted that important conclusion and yet he(Chris) claimed he's objective and non partisan. CommonMan!
It's "come on, man"
Thanks for the correction
I'm waiting for the poll once Biden is officially the candidate. All these polls are wishful thinking. Yes, I too think Biden is old, but Trump is old. I honestly think Trump is on his pathway to dementia like his dad. His word salads are getting worse and just went long riff on how Obama is president. Once it is final candidates, everyone who knows Trump should not be president will stand alongside Biden. This is the fate underway. Hang tight for the rollercoaster ride!
I understand that Chris feel strongly about his analysis. However, I think he continues to push the Biden/old narrative which is misleading.
With regards to the NYT poll, I think he isn’t looking at the right information. Don’t lose sleep over Chris’ inaccurate take and the NYT poll. I would recommend people look for Jay Kuo’s breakdown on this poll that delves into why this poll doesn’t reflect reality (women numbers are skewed, as well as Dean Phillips’ support, young people vote, Latino vote is skewed, etc).
I wish Chris would stop pushing Biden’s age as a bigger problem to democracy than Trump’s incompetency and authoritarian desires. If Trump were ever to become president again (god forbid) he would take charge of the media and press and sources that would be critical of Trump, like Chris has been some time, would be shut down.
I would hope that Chris would start pushing a different narrative and the danger to our country that Trump represents rather than Biden’s age being the issue. By doing this he is assisting sending our country into a dictatorship. You only have to compare the two presidencies to know who is a better leader for this country.
See, that's the thing: I don't "push" ANY any narrative. I report and analyze the facts.
Biden's age IS. problem because a majority of voters in EVERY poll say it is a problem. That's not because of me! Or the media!
Again, you can dislike the poll numbers. That is absolutely your right. But please don't suggest I am "pushing" an agenda. Never have, never will.
He doesn't have to push any Narrative. Biden doesn't need him to win. He should just be objective and independent as he promised to do but has not being doing.
The media/pollsters/commentators all seem committed to the "Biden is too old" narrative — as you clearly are, Chris. Why aren't there any polls that ask, "Is Donald Trump too corrupt to be president?"
Chris doesnt have anything to do with what they poll. He is just reporting on it
Thank you.
I understand. But Chris is doubling down on the media's favorite frame for the election — "Biden is too old." (He flogs the issue at least weekly in here.) That whole frame seems designed to make the election about a side issue — Biden's age — and to make sure all voters view the election that way. A disservice to democracy.
Nope. Voters FEEL that way. Look at EVERY poll. Suggesting this is some media creation is simply false. The media doesn't have anywhere near that much power!
I'm not doubting there's some voter sentiment that way. It would be unnatural if there was not evidence, given the drumbeat of "Biden is too old" that media outlets (and you) have been hammering for months.
Chris, I am tasking you to challenge the media to ask this equally-subjective question: "Is Donald Trump too corrupt to be president?" Then we can untangle the cross tabs on that one.
I'm counting on you, Chris!
Chris;
The key data elements are against Biden, but in no poll have I read questions related to the neutering of the Justice Department, the prison camps for migrants, the fealty to Putin, and suspension of our constitution. Ask voters about those things and I’m quite sure passions will emerge. Biden may be boring and old, but he is not a rapist, fraud, or insurrectionist. In short: the polls need to re-focus on what Trump will do and ask if voters still would vote for him.
OBTW where’s Melania? I’ll bet she’s gone from his orbit.
This is NOT good news for Biden. But how many times has he been counted out as finished and beyond hope and yet bounced back? Not to be Pollyanna-ish about it, but I think Thursday night's State of the Union will amount to the actual start of the campaign. Let's see where we are a week or so from now.
Once? Just like Trump in 2016. But good point about the State of the Union.
When I consider the manner in which polls are now conducted, I find them to be rather useless. So there's that...
Although this poll has some worrying trends, and Sienna may have a decent track record, polls this early are notoriously not predictive of an election that is 8 months away.
When you look at the methodology you see this….
“980 registered voters nationwide, including 823 who completed the full survey,”. Many of the answers are from the 823 who stayed around for all the questions.
In 2020 there were over 155 MILLION votes cast for the two main candidates.
The breakdown of self-identifiers dilutes the numbers even more…
49% Republican Party (or lean Republican)
43% Democratic Party (or lean Democratic)
When asked “What single news source do you turn to most often”
Of the 19% that volunteered a cable news source, 52% said Fox.
10% - Fox
7% CNN
2% MSNBC
Another 4% volunteered…”conservative news site” or Newsmax.
A frightening 17% volunteered “Social Media”. Conservatives dominate “social media”
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/26/censorship-conservatives-social-media-432643
What is really disconcerting and why relying on one poll to make sweeping assumptions of what is going to happen in November is fact that 12% of the respondents self-identified as “Black” or only 98 people.
There are 35 MILLION Black people over the age of 18 in America today. And we are supposed to obsess over 98 people’s opinions?!?!?
Even more ridiculous is that of those 98 Blacks, only 66% said they were going to vote for Joe Biden and a whopping 23% for Trump.
If anyone believes that Trump will get 23% of the Black vote, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
After Labor Day when the majority of voters really start paying attention to the election, the reality of the stark choice between serial criminal, sex abuser, fraudster and sociopathic liar and con-man Donald Trump and old but effective Joe Biden will make relaying on polls like this look foolish
THANKS DAVE!!! FOR DIGGING INTO THE SO CALLED GOLD STANDARD POLL. THE SAMPLE SIZE IS SO SMALL, THE DEMOGRAPHICS OF THE SMALL SAMPLE ANALYZED IS VERY SKEWED. ANYONE WHO UNDERSTANDS BASIC STATISTICS WOULD NOT PAY A PENNY FOR THAT NYT POLLS. PERIOD!!!. STOP BEING EXCITED (BIDEN'S HATRRS)
Here’s the thing….polling has been wildly incorrect over the last few cycles, and if it comes down to Trump vs Biden, fear alone will drive Americans who are whinging about Biden to vote for him anyway. I did that myself in 2020 He was my third choice, but the prospect of a second Trump administration lit a fire under my behind to get to the polls and keep Donald J Trump far, far away from the Resolute desk. Biden is old, Biden seems more frail, Biden is sharp, passionate, and committed to democracy, and Biden is not Trump. Prognosticators may prognosticate, Americans are not going to hand their nation to a racist, xenophobic,homophobic, misogynistic,anti-semitic, cognitvely impaired criminal.. That said, publishing these items as Chris has done here only helps voters to realize that they must be involved and aware, and vote, vote, vote
It feels like 2020 was such an awful year for everyone that people have just memory holed what Trump was like when there were multiple crises.
I feel the response to this is going to lead to Chris writing a "what I am doing here" column.
I won't do that because I feel like I have been very clear what I am doing here ;)
When did you become The New York Times? 😵💫
What concerns me more than anything, Chris, is that you simply take the NYT/Siena poll at face value without looking at the CLEAR discrepancies in the crosstabs. No, I don’t like the results, but that has NOTHING to do with my complaint. I look to you for thoughtful and accurate analysis, but you seriously dropped the ball on this!
I’ve read 4 or 5 excellent analyses (Jay Kuo of The Status Kuo has one of the best), and you’ve missed the serious issues. Sure, generally speaking, the NYT/Siena polls have been better quality than most, but this one is an embarrassment.
Here’s just a smattering of the comments I’ve read that you totally blew by:
Only 980 people were contacted. That’s an extremely small sample, based upon 155M voting in 2020.
Over 80% of Hispanic voters were interviewed in English and not Spanish, which is completely non-representative. Even Televisa pointed that out this week!
The poll over-represents rural voters. In the 2020 election, they were 19%. In this poll, they’re 36%.
Biden won women by 11% in 2020 and that was BEFORE the Dobbs decision. This poll has Trump up by 1%. In what possible world, given how completely motivating the Dobbs decision has been in EVERY election held since it struck down Roe v Wade, does Trump win with women?!? Elections are far more representative than polls and this one alone makes the results HIGHLY unreliable.
The poll says virtually ALL Trump 2020 voters will vote for him again. How does that fare with the Republican primaries, where 30% to 40% voted for non-Trump candidates, and 43% of Haley voters said they would vote for Biden in a head-to-head battle? Sure, there were, in some states, independents that could crossover and vote in the Republican primary and may have skewed it somewhat, but not by THAT large an amount!
Speaking of independents, the poll says Biden will win them by 4%. And voters that dislike BOTH Trump and Biden say they will vote by a 12% margin for Biden. And the poll says that Trump will win by 5%?!
Millennials prefer Trump by a margin 13% HIGHER than Baby Boomers?! Have they ever talked to a millennial?!
These are just a few points that other writers on Substack have made over the last few days, prior to this article of yours, and the lack of analytical detail on the methodology of this flawed poll in your article is extremely disappointing, Chris. I would hope you do better next time.
Pray for Trump convictions🙏🏾
Chris in the chart you showed with polls, you conveniently ommitted the Quinnipiac poll that showed Biden beating Trump by 4 points. Is it because that didn't fit into your narrative ?
As Biden continues sliding in the polls, and his mobility and speech continue to show decline, how does it make sense to say that JB WILL BE THE CANDIDATE? Sure, if he kills it at tha SOTU, and then hits the campaign trail running...well, jogging..kinda...life could be good again. Go Joe! But if Biden continues to bumble through the speech and the immediate aftermath he MUST step aside. There is too much at stake to let stubbornness and tradition take us over the abyss.