How polling averages could be underestimating the Democrats

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Why do some experts think Republican-leaning pollsters are distorting polling averages?

As computer scientist Laskshya Jain notes at Split Ticket, there are an unusually large number of partisan firms polling state and national elections this year. And those Republican-aligned firms are seeing a very different race for Congress than non-partisan pollsters.

In one version of the story, Republicans are on track to win the national popular vote for the House by 3 points, which would comfortably deliver the lower chamber and make them the favorite to win the Senate, too; but non-partisan polls point to a "dead heat" that gives Democrats a fighting chance to retain one or even both branches of Congress.

Jain, who thinks Republicans will win the House and that the Senate is a toss-up, is careful to note that he's not endorsing the idea that the non-partisan pollsters are right and the Republican groups are wrong. But he and his colleagues created a separate poll tracker that only includes well-regarded non-partisan polls and excludes partisan pollsters like Insider Advantage on both sides, including Democratic outfits like Data For Progress. As of this morning, that aggregator shows Republicans leading the generic ballot narrowly.

What is the Trafalgar Group?

The most prolific of the GOP pollsters is called the Trafalgar Group, and the organization's leader, Robert Cahaly, somewhat famously refuses to share its surveys' "cross-tabs" — where you can see how Black, Latino, or young voters intend to vote, according to the survey. And while his group may have gotten close to the margins in some high-profile races, Cahaly was also adamant that Trump would win in 2020 with Arizona, Michigan, and Pennsylvania going for the Republican instead of Joe Biden.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/polling-averages-could-underestimating-democrats-095809931.html

[underpants]

1. Funny just yesterday I heard well research proof that Republicans were under represented

By at least 3% in polls. It was on talk radio with a reporter from Epoch Times. They mentioned the organization that did this research but I missed it. Of course the host and the guest stated how outstanding this research organization was.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

4. Epoch Times AKA Falun Gong

[underpants]

6. Yes. I was being sarcastic

[elleng]

2. Because they are 'Republican-leaning pollsters?'

[Lovie777]

3. They set the motion .....

it's called herding. NYT started it and the polling outfits followed suit and still continue to with some expections. Hassan is probably a good % ahead of cat litter dude, too.

[PortTack]

5. Yet Trafalgar has a A-/B+ rating on 538. Why?

This is why I give zero attention to 538. RCP with their very right leaning supporters..same. Not giving them any credibility either.

[W_HAMILTON]

11. That is questionable.

I thought it was because they correctly predicted some races back when Republicans were """undercounted,""" but checking Trafalgar's accuracy, they have predicted only 66% of races correctly. I then thought that it was maybe because 538 reviewed Trafalgar's polling methodology and thought it was worthy of a high grade, but this article says that they don't even release all the pertinent information (e.g., the crosstabs) from their polls?! In which case, yeah, what the hell is 538 thinking?

[Indykatie]

12. I Read that 538 Ratings Is Based on Last 30 Days for Partisan Polling Outfits

These partisan pollsters (and Trafalgar was used as an example) mostly produce outlier polls until close to the election and then issue polls in line with other independent pollsters. I'm watching to see if Rassmussen and Trafalgar issue polls more friendly to Dems right before 11/8.

[PortTack]

13. Yes..have seen them do that. So you are absolutely right. They are nothing more than

Partisan polls.

[ColinC]

7. On top of that, non partisan pollsters admittedly have a republican bias

Based on their error from 2020. It could very possibly, be a blowout in favor of Dems.

[FBaggins]

9. That's the hope anyway

The confounding factor that I haven't seen discussed is that we know the party does lots of its own polling.

They're throwing huge sums of cash and effort into some races that should not even be part of the discussion if the polling consensus is as far off as we hope. I'd hate to lose GA/PA because the last millions were redirected to Patty Murray... only to watch her win by double digits.

[ColinC]

10. My guess (and really hope) is that the methodologies have changed across the board

For all polling firms, and they would all have a bias. It is unfortunate, if true, and we throw lots of money into races that aren’t nearly as close as they appear to be.

[Joe Cool]

8. At least in Pennsylvania...

I know I keep bringing up this topic about yard signs in western Pennsylvania but I have never seen so many signs for Democratic candidates (Shapiro for governor, Fetterman for Senate, Pastore for Congress) in red areas in my life. It's hard not to notice the Democratic yard signs which have been, at times, pretty non-existent in the past in predominantly Republican areas. I know of a few Republicans (the moderate kind, they do still exist) who are pretty much voting straight Democratic this election. Even those Republicans have started to admit the party, specifically Trump supporters, have turned into a cult.

[PortTack]

14. This election ....is much more about yard signs and other indicators of possible victory rather than

Polls. There are just too many unknowns for anyone to say they really have a clear grasp of the outcome.

Special elections and ballot initiatives these past 2 years were not accurately predicted and there were a lot of them!

[tinrobot]

15. GOP-leaning pollsters want to create enough of a polling disparity to claim fraud.

It's all part of the plan.

"Our candidate was polling at 49% in multiple (right wing) polls, there's no way the result was 46%." We actually won, it was rigged, redo the election, blah blah blah...