The Times Australia
The Times World News

.
The Times Real Estate

.

The US presidential election is too close to call. Don’t blame the polls

  • Written by Samuel Garrett, Research Associate, United States Studies Centre, University of Sydney



With just hours remaining until election day in the United States, pundits and the public alike are scouring public opinion polls for early signs of a result.

We’ve had months of campaigning and hundreds[1] of polls. Yet, there are still few conclusive takeaways other than the dissatisfying catchphrase of election analysts the world over this year: “it’s too close to call”.

So, why is this happening? And what are we to make of the polls?

Polling isn’t predictive

Both campaigns have at different times touted favourable – and conflicting – polling numbers. The trouble is no one seems to know which polls to believe.

On Sunday, a new Des Moines Register poll[2] headed by respected pollster[3] Ann Selzer showed Kamala Harris with a surprise three-point lead over Donald Trump in Iowa, providing an unexpected boost to Harris’ anxious campaign.

Within hours, a “confidential” Trump campaign memo dismissed[4] Selzer’s numbers. Trump himself tweeted[5] favourable polling from AtlasIntel that shows him leading in all seven swing states.

In recent cycles, despite misses in some key states – particularly in Wisconsin in 2016[6] and 2020[7] – averages of polling have tended to be relatively accurate[8] estimations of public opinion.

However, there is little that can be gleaned from current swing state margins that are all within the margin of error, other than what we already know: Americans are deeply divided over their choices.

Part of the reason why is that polls are not predictive. They are a measure of popular sentiment at the time of the poll, from which educated guesses can be made about who may win a future election.

But margins of error (which are significantly higher[9] than generally understood), combined with regularly razor-thin final vote tallies in key states and the winner-takes-all nature of the electoral college, limits their ability to predict electoral winners.

The size and direction of polling errors are unpredictable[10], particularly because they are often not uniform across the country, and historically don’t favour one party more than another.

Small misses have outsized impacts

Methodologically, accurate election polling is made more difficult in the United States because of high non-response rates and non-compulsory voting (which requires weighting responses based on predicted likely voters).

Errors in these assumptions were key to polling errors in 2016 and 2020.

Polls in 2016 famously underestimated Trump’s support by failing[11] to control for education in their samples.

This meant they missed his support among white, non-college educated voters[12] who helped propel him to victory in the Midwest.

But while 2016 is remembered as a catastrophic failure of opinion polling for apparently failing to predict a Trump victory, polling averages heading into election day were, in fact, broadly accurate.

National polls were among the most accurate[13] in 80 years, overstating Clinton’s popular vote margin only by about one percentage point.

Across the ten closest states in the 2016 election, Trump was underestimated on average by just 1.4%.

Misses in a handful of key states such as Wisconsin[14], while significant, had an outsized impact on the final result.

The margins were such that a difference of just a few points of polling error were enough to flip so-called blue wall states and deliver what most analysts had considered to be an unthinkable victory for Trump.

Nevertheless, it was the polls – rather than analytical mistakes and poor media reporting – which copped the blame for failing to convey that the unthinkable was in fact quite probable, despite the margins of error making clear that there was a strong statistical likelihood of a different result.

Polls were much wider off the mark in 2020 but avoided the same level of public scrutiny given they correctly (if narrowly) “predicted” a Biden victory.

US presidential candiates Democrat Hillary Clinton (R) and Republican Donald Trump (L) during the second presidential debate at Washington University
Errors in important assumptions were key to polling errors in 2016 and 2020. EPA/JIM LO SCALZO[15]

Have pollsters fixed past flaws?

Based on polling averages[16] in 2024, a uniform error in Trump’s favour of less than 0.8% across the seven key swing states could deliver him a comfortable 312–226 electoral college victory.

Equally, a uniform shift of less than three percentage points in Harris’ favour could deliver an equally lopsided 319–219 win for the Democrats.

The critical question is whether pollsters have done enough to amend the flawed methodologies that underestimated Trump’s support in 2016 and 2020.

Changes in some polls include[17] an increase in hybrid sampling methods (mixing both phone calls and online interviews) and weighting on past votes.

But such methods could be overcompensating[18] for past mistakes and now underestimating[19] Harris’ support by failing to sample them properly.

Until the votes are counted and the winner declared, there is no sure way of knowing.

Polls can’t do everything

Polling remains remarkably accurate, given that it is an attempt to divine the views of hundreds of millions of people. But it is a mistake to believe polling is predictive or determinative.

The vagaries of polling – and, most of all, the vagaries of the US electoral system – mean there is little point attempting to read the tea leaves beyond the broad public sentiment that polling captures.

On these numbers, the result could indeed come down to a handful of votes, or instead see a lopsided electoral college victory.

Either way, don’t blame the polls.

References

  1. ^ hundreds (abcnews.go.com)
  2. ^ poll (www.abc.net.au)
  3. ^ respected pollster (fivethirtyeight.com)
  4. ^ dismissed (cdn.nucleusfiles.com)
  5. ^ tweeted (x.com)
  6. ^ 2016 (www.realclearpolling.com)
  7. ^ 2020 (www.realclearpolling.com)
  8. ^ relatively accurate (www.nytimes.com)
  9. ^ significantly higher (www.nytimes.com)
  10. ^ unpredictable (www.nytimes.com)
  11. ^ failing (aapor.org)
  12. ^ white, non-college educated voters (aapor.org)
  13. ^ among the most accurate (aapor.org)
  14. ^ Wisconsin (www.realclearpolling.com)
  15. ^ EPA/JIM LO SCALZO (photos.aap.com.au)
  16. ^ averages (www.realclearpolling.com)
  17. ^ include (thehill.com)
  18. ^ overcompensating (www.politico.com)
  19. ^ underestimating (www.politico.com)

Read more https://theconversation.com/the-us-presidential-election-is-too-close-to-call-dont-blame-the-polls-242763

The Times Features

Best Deals on Home Furniture Online

Key Highlights Discover the best deals on high-quality outdoor furniture online. Transform your outdoor space into a stylish and comfortable oasis. Explore a wide range of d...

Discover the Best Women's Jumpers for Every Season

Key Highlights Explore lightweight jumpers for spring and summer, ensuring breathability and ease. Wrap up warm with cozy wool jumpers for the chilly autumn and winter season...

Uncover the Elegance of Gorgeous Diamond Tennis Necklaces

Key Highlights Diamond tennis necklaces are a timeless piece of jewelry that exudes elegance and sophistication. They feature a continuous line of brilliant-cut diamonds, cre...

Dental Implants vs. Dentures: Which Is Better for You?

When it comes to replacing missing teeth, two of the most common options are dental implants and dentures. Both have their advantages and disadvantages, so choosing between them ...

What Neck Pain Really Means (And Why It’s More Than Just Poor Posture)

Neck pain is often brushed off as something temporary — a tight spot after a long day at the desk or a poor night’s sleep. But when the discomfort keeps returning, it could be a ...

The Work of Gosha Rubchinskiy: Fashion, Culture, and Youth

From Designer to Cultural Architect Gosha Rubchinskiy is not just a fashion designer—he's a cultural force. Born in Moscow in 1984, Rubchinskiy began his career in fashion in t...

Times Magazine

The Essential Guide to Transforming Office Spaces for Maximum Efficiency

Why Office Fitouts MatterA well-designed office can make all the difference in productivity, employee satisfaction, and client impressions. Businesses of all sizes are investing in updated office spaces to create environments that foster collaborat...

The A/B Testing Revolution: How AI Optimized Landing Pages Without Human Input

A/B testing was always integral to the web-based marketing world. Was there a button that converted better? Marketing could pit one against the other and see which option worked better. This was always through human observation, and over time, as d...

Using Countdown Timers in Email: Do They Really Increase Conversions?

In a world that's always on, where marketers are attempting to entice a subscriber and get them to convert on the same screen with one email, the power of urgency is sometimes the essential element needed. One of the most popular ways to create urg...

Types of Software Consultants

In today's technology-driven world, businesses often seek the expertise of software consultants to navigate complex software needs. There are several types of software consultants, including solution architects, project managers, and user experienc...

CWU Assistive Tech Hub is Changing Lives: Win a Free Rollator Walker This Easter!

🌟 Mobility. Independence. Community. All in One. This Easter, the CWU Assistive Tech Hub is pleased to support the Banyule community by giving away a rollator walker. The giveaway will take place during the Macleod Village Easter Egg Hunt & Ma...

"Eternal Nurture" by Cara Barilla: A Timeless Collection of Wisdom and Healing

Renowned Sydney-born author and educator Cara Barilla has released her latest book, Eternal Nurture, a profound collection of inspirational quotes designed to support mindfulness, emotional healing, and personal growth. With a deep commitment to ...

LayBy Shopping