Posted on 10/28/2020 10:12:59 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Earlier this week, we wrote about the Trafalgar Group, an outlier pollster that routinely produces rosier results for President Trump's re-election prospects than any of its competitors. If you're on the Trump Train, you love Trafalgar, and you likely already know that its data was much more predictive of some of Trump's upset victories in 2016 -- not to mention calling the 2018 Florida governor's race correctly when basically no one else did. That said, you may be less interested in the outfit's big swings and misses, like overestimating Brian Kemp's victory margin in Georgia's gubernatorial contest last cycle by ten points. True to form, Trafalgar's latest survey shows President Trump inching into the lead in Pennsylvania:
Our new @trafalgar_group #2020Election #BattlegroundState #PApoll conducted Oct 24-25 shows undecided shrinking and a narrow Trump lead for the first time:
48.4% @realDonaldTrump,
47.6% @JoeBiden,
2.2% @Jorgensen4POTUS,
0.7% Other,
1.0% Und. See Report: https://t.co/qf16dkxcCX
pic.twitter.com/Vv3i8R4cK1 Robert C. Cahaly (@RobertCahaly) October 27, 2020
For context, the previous six Keystone State polls gave Biden an average lead of 5.5 points (though another right-leaning pollster also shows Trump surging ahead). Trafalgar's chief pollster told me that part of their "secret sauce" is asking questions that reduce the impact of "social desirability bias" in respondents' answers. The idea is that given the loud opposition to Trump across much of mass media and other taste-making institutions, some people may not want to admit to a stranger over the phone that they plan on voting for him. Part of the way Trafalgar tries to home in on someone's true intentions is to ask them more indirect questions that may reveal their actual preferences. As it turns out, USC's pollster has been doing something similar for a number of years, and here's what they've found:
From our previous research on social judgments, we learned that people seem to know their immediate social circles quite well. Their answers about the distribution of income, health status even the relationship satisfaction of their friends, family and acquaintances were often in the right ballpark. And when we averaged the data from their responses across a large national sample, it provided a surprisingly accurate picture of the overall population in all five of the elections in which we tested this question, the social circle question predicted election outcomes better than traditional questions about voters own intentions. These five elections were the 2016 U.S. Presidential election, the 2017 French Presidential election, the 2017 Dutch Parliamentary election, the 2018 Swedish Parliamentary election, and the 2018 U.S. election for House of Representatives. In both the U.S. elections, the social-circle question predicted national and state level results better than the own intention question in the same polls. In fact, data from the social-circle question in 2016 accurately predicted which candidate won each state, so it predicted Trumps electoral college victory
Five for five thus far. So what is their data showing this year? Their traditional polling model gives Biden a double-digit lead in the national horserace, pointing to an easy win and a brutal GOP night. But their "social circle" data, which "predicted outcomes better than traditional questions" is telling a different story:
When we calculate how many electoral votes each candidate could get based on state level averages of the own-intention and social-circle questions, its looking like an Electoral College loss for Biden. We should note that our poll was not designed for state-level predictions, and in some states we have very few participants. Even so, in 2016 it predicted that Trump would win the electoral vote.
Small sample sizes, bank-shot methodology, strange year. Every asterisk applies. But still. Allahpundit notes that asking people how they think their state will vote produces an even bigger Trump electoral college win, but also offers some compelling counterpoints:
Its possible that the traditional polls are right and the social circle data is wrong, of course. Both parties this year seem convinced that Trump will do better than his current numbers, righties because theyre convinced that Trump fans are a silent majority despite the fact that hes never had a job approval average north of 50 percent and lefties because they have hardcore electoral PTSD from 2016 that makes them fear Trump fans are perennially underestimated. But neither of those things is necessarily true. USC speculates that the pandemic might be throwing off peoples assessments of how their friends intend to vote this year for the simple reason that were all spending less time around our friends...
...One obvious question about social desirability bias, though. If its true that thats distorting the traditional polls and producing more encouraging numbers for Biden, whether because people are embarrassed to tell pollsters the truth or because they fear being punished somehow if their community knew their support for Trump, why are we seeing Biden faring better than Clinton in blood-red states? People who live in Montana, say, shouldnt have reason to feel shy about telling some anonymous polling apparatchik that theyre MAGA and proud, yet Trumps leading Biden there right now by single digits. He won the state by 20 four years ago. If anything, you might expect social desirability bias to *overstate* Trumps support in very red states: If youre a closet Biden supporter surrounded by hardcore Trumpers, maybe you want to keep that information to yourself.
I've wondered about these exact same effects myself. The guessing game will be over soon enough -- but as I've been saying, either Biden wins fairly comfortably, or American political polling will be viewed with even more deep-seated suspicion. The former vice president leads comfortably nationally (although a few of the latest results on RCP's aggregator are creeping closer), and must be considered the strong favorite. And as I mentioned on Monday, the canary in the coal mine for Hillary Clinton four years ago was district-level polling that deviated dramatically from the national and even state-level numbers. And in that realm, Trump is doing quite poorly this cycle, which could be a meaningful red flag for his campaign. Yet another example of that phenomenon, out of Pennsylvania:
District-level polling is painting a hugely different picture of the race right now. This was a Clinton +1 district.
https://t.co/tNbpHENq9a Jackson Bryman (@kilometerbryman) October 27, 2020
If Trump winds up winning or coming close, people may be talking about the Trafalgar and USC models a lot more. If he ends up losing big, ominous district-level data could end up being a harbinger yet again. I'll leave you with this -- and the numbers in places like Florida and North Carolina have moved in the incumbent's favor since this was tweeted:
RCP battleground poll average:
??????. ????, ????????
Florida: (Tied)
Pennsylvania: Clinton +5.6
Michigan: +7
Wisc: +6.2
NC: +3.2
??????????
Florida: Biden +1.2
Pennsylvania: +5.1
Michigan: +7.8
Wisc: +4.6
NC: +1.5
???? https://t.co/ZBRpAvXwZT https://t.co/GZmTCAxlSI Frank Luntz (@FrankLuntz) October 25, 2020
I'd also caution against excessive doom or exuberance based on partisan breakdowns of early voting turnout or returned ballots. Trump opponents are starting to freak out about Florida, for instance, but there are so many unknowns at play -- and the breakdown of independents seems like a really big X factor that could very well favor Biden. Wait and see:
Whispers: *What if Republicans are just cannibalizing their Election Day turnout? What if registered Rs vote for Trump at lower rates than 2016? What if Biden blows the roof out with voting among registered Is who vote? This tells us almost nothing.* https://t.co/N9HZ10a4XE Sean T at RCP (@SeanTrende) October 28, 2020
Psst. Trump will win the popular vote, too.
Blacks will be down minimum of 3m, “Yut”s will be down 1m.
That’s the old PV.
Read this new piece from USC Dornsife and youll find some familiar themes on social desirability bias. Thats the same problem that Trafalgar pollster Robert Cahaly has sought to address in his surveys of battleground states, which he claims is why his data is reliably rosier for Trump much, much rosier in some cases than the rest of the polling industrys. Cahalys baseline assumption is that there are many more Trump supporters out there than the commentariat realizes but that theyre being overlooked in polling for complicated reasons. Some may be embarrassed about their support for Trump and dont want to admit it to another person. Some may fear harassment by neighbors or other antagonistic forces (reasonably or not) if their support for Trump became known. Some may simply not pick up the phone when a pollster calls, or give an insincere answer just to mess with the person on the line. Cahalys methods aim to remove social desirability bias from the equation, to peer through the haze of some MAGA fans reluctance to admit their support and see the true picture of the electorate.
USCs trying to do the same thing. How do you get an accurate sense of how people are planning to vote if some of them are unwilling to be honest about their intentions? You ask them about other peoples intentions. Not Will you vote for Trump? but Do you think your friends and neighbors are voting for Trump? According to USC, that type of social-circle question similar to Trafalgars approach shows Trump faring better than most polls indicate. And not just better, but well enough to pull another rabbit out of the hat in the electoral college next Tuesday.
From our previous research on social judgments, we learned that people seem to know their immediate social circles quite well. Their answers about the distribution of income, health status even the relationship satisfaction of their friends, family and acquaintances were often in the right ballpark. And when we averaged the data from their responses across a large national sample, it provided a surprisingly accurate picture of the overall population
[I]n all five of the elections in which we tested this question, the social circle question predicted election outcomes better than traditional questions about voters own intentions. These five elections were the 2016 U.S. Presidential election, the 2017 French Presidential election, the 2017 Dutch Parliamentary election, the 2018 Swedish Parliamentary election, and the 2018 U.S. election for House of Representatives.
In both the U.S. elections, the social-circle question predicted national and state level results better than the own intention question in the same polls. In fact, data from the social-circle question in 2016 accurately predicted which candidate won each state, so it predicted Trumps electoral college victory
When we calculate how many electoral votes each candidate could get based on state level averages of the own-intention and social-circle questions, its looking like an Electoral College loss for Biden. We should note that our poll was not designed for state-level predictions, and in some states we have very few participants. Even so, in 2016 it predicted that Trump would win the electoral vote.
USC is also asking people which candidate they think will win their home state and those results show an even steeper Biden electoral-college loss than the social circle results do. Whats especially noteworthy about this is that USC has been conducting its own daily panel poll on the presidential race and has had Sleepy Joe ahead the entire time comfortably. Today they have him up 11 points nationally, indicating a Democratic bloodbath.
What theyre doing here with the experimental questions, in other words, is giving readers reason to believe that their own horse-race poll is wildly, embarrassingly wrong.
Its possible that the traditional polls are right and the social circle data is wrong, of course. Both parties this year seem convinced that Trump will do better than his current numbers, righties because theyre sure that Trump fans are a silent majority despite the fact that hes never had a job approval average north of 50 percent and lefties because they have hardcore electoral PTSD from 2016 that makes them fear Trump fans are perennially underestimated. But neither of those things is necessarily true. USC speculates that the pandemic might be throwing off peoples assessments of how their friends intend to vote for the simple reason that were all spending less time around each other now. Our information about the day-to-day happenings of our social circle is poorer, therefore our knowledge of their political inclinations is weaker. And our opportunities to influence each other on how to vote are fewer. Your MAGA buddy may have twisted your arm in 2016. Nowadays hes busy trying not to get COVID and stay afloat financially, just like everyone else.
Theres an obvious question about social desirability bias too. If its true that its distorting the traditional polls and producing artificially encouraging numbers for Biden, whether because people are embarrassed to tell pollsters the truth or because they fear being punished somehow if their community knew their support for Trump, why are we seeing Biden faring better than Clinton in blood-red states? People who live in Montana, say, shouldnt have reason to feel shy about telling some anonymous polling apparatchik that theyre MAGA and proud, yet Trumps leading Biden there right now by single digits. He won the state by 20 four years ago.
Experimental but accurate? Perhaps, but time will be a better judge, in my opinion. But either way I think they are right that President Trump will be reelected.
I am no fan of Guy Benson. He is a 2016 Never Trumper, LOVES Meghan McStain and talks out of both sides of his mouth.
He wrote an article supporting the appointment of Meghan McCain to fill her father’s Senate seat.
Sorry, I don’t care for Guy Benson.
RE: Psst. Trump will win the popular vote, too.
Hey Professor, The last time (2016), California and New York combined gave Hillary the popular vote. You seem to be telling us that these two states won’t be a factor in the popular vote this year?
www.primarymodel.com
RE: I am no fan of Guy Benson. He is a 2016 Never Trumper,
Regardless pf how you feel about him, he is REFERRING to pollsters and QUOTING THEM. At least look at what the pollsters are saying, you can ignore Benson’s own take on this if you wish.
That’s nice.
Keep fighting like we’re the third monkey on the ramp to Noah’s Ark
and brother, it’s starting to rain.
That, is a good one.
After having to deal with Pelosi and Schiff PDJT deserves a 50 state win.
What do you think about the latest ABC News/Wash Post poll that has Biden up +17 over Trump in Wisconsin and +7 in Mich?
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3898889/posts
How can they predict these numbers and keep any semblance of credibility by next week, or do they know something we’re not being told?
Well, I’m in PA. Seeing more Biden signs than there were Clinton signs, though still very few.
Nevertheless, I can’t see the voters backing a candidate who would deliberately steer this country into a ditch.
Oh man, Im stealing that one. Still laughing.
I think President Trump will get more votes in California than he did in 2016. He will not win California but his percentage will increase. Probably the same for New York.
I believe the author is correct. If Trump wins Florida, then all he needs to win the EC is just one of the states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin or Minnesota, assuming he carries all the other states he won in 2016 outside of those states. I believe he’ll win at least one of those four states.
So Trump Winning Florida is the key here, which substantially improves Trumps path to victory.
Trump - 322
What do you think about the latest ABC News/Wash Post poll that has Biden up +17 over Trump in Wisconsin and +7 in Mich?
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3898889/posts
How can they predict these numbers and keep any semblance of credibility by next week, or do they know something were not being told?
_______________________________
Really, some of the media polls are producing numbers that border on comedy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.