Staff Reports
Kamala Harris might be seeing some numbers that make her supporters giddy, but a closer look reveals that the excitement could be nothing more than smoke and mirrors. With all the chatter around her poll numbers bouncing back a bit, one has to wonder if it’s just an illusion created by an oversampling of Democrats. If her only competition is Joe Biden’s cringeworthy performance, it’s no surprise she might catch a slight breeze in the world of polls. However, the history of polling suggests caution should be our guiding light.
Historically, the polls have shown more optimism for Democrats than reality would bear out, particularly when it comes to Donald Trump in critical battleground states. Back in 2016 and 2020, polling averages underestimated Trump by nine and five points, respectively. Currently, Harris’s lead, as reported by The New York Times/Siena poll, is a measly four points. Meanwhile, a glance at the Real Clear Politics average shows that Harris’s lead shrinks to just 0.8 percent in a crowded field, leaving the door wide open for Trump to claim victory in what seems to be another case of polling pitfalls.
CNN’s senior data reporter Harry Enten explains to @andersoncooper the latest ABC News-Washington Post poll, which shows Americans’ support for the US’s involvement in Ukraine is slightly down. pic.twitter.com/w4JDXyCVTV
— CNN (@CNN) February 21, 2023
Analyzing the credibility of these polls generates more questions than answers. Even seasoned Democratic strategist David Axelrod seemed dubious of the numbers, describing some aspects of the polling as “improbable.” If one tweaks the numbers to account for over-representation and sampling biases, the races appear neck-and-neck—perhaps Harris has a slight edge in Wisconsin, but that’s hardly a cause for Democratic celebration.
For a touch of historical perspective, consider that on this very date in 2016, Hillary Clinton was boasting a 6.8 percent lead in national polling, right before her spectacular defeat. The take-home here is clear: being ahead in the popular vote doesn’t guarantee victory, as it demonstrated back in 2016.
The notion of increased enthusiasm for Harris has also been called into question. Despite perceived excitement, actual voter commitment hasn’t shifted significantly since May. Voter intentions in three key battleground states reveal that those “almost certain to vote” have barely budged, while Trump seems to be garnering more commitment than his counterpart. As time marches on, Trump’s popularity is reportedly greater now than in either of his previous campaigns, exposing the fallacies of the current administration’s performance on the economy and border security—two issues that resonate deeply with the electorate.
In summary, it’s prudent to assume a tight race as the election looms, but one must remain vigilant against the typical media manipulation that inflates poll numbers every four years. Democrats and their media allies are often quick to tout rosy projections that don’t align with reality—this year should be no different. Buckle up, because as history suggests, the road to the voting booth can be riddled with surprises that no poll can accurately predict.
