During this election, many of us on both sides were obsessed with polls, betting markets, rally sizes, and any sort of tea leaves we could read to gauge where this election stood. In my extensive coverage of the polls this year, one thing that stood out was how the left refused to accept the results of polling that didn't tell them what they wanted to hear. This happens on both sides, but from what I could see, if people on the right thought a poll was suspicious, they would look at the crosstabs and tell you why it was wrong.
If people on the left didn't like the topline results, however, they would accuse the pollster of bias and call it a day. One outfit in particular that endured a lot of criticism from the left was Rasmussen Reports. In fact, they were removed from both FiveThirtyEight and Nate Silver's election models for being a "partisan" pollster.
The day after Trump won, I spoke with Mark Mitchell, the head pollster at Rasmussen Reports, about the election results and how vindicated he feels in light of them.
"What a pack of lying scumbags the entire industry is," he said. "I got a lot of flack for saying that this was gonna be 1980s-style landslide. And I think it was a landslide, but as I said, Trump’s not gonna get as much as Reagan because there was a third-party spoiler, but the parallels are that back then, all the pollsters were lying. They were saying that the race was too close to call. This race was never too close to call according to my numbers, and they just ignored them."
"So, yeah. I feel pretty vindicated," he said. "People try and cherrypick our results to show that we're inaccurate, but we did pretty good in the last few cycles, and I think we did even better now."
Rasmussen's final national poll had Trump +3 over Kamala, which was spot-on accurate. Their state polling was also remarkably on target, compared to their competitors. Rasmussen correctly called the winner in 93% of these states and stayed within the margin of error 79% of the time, demonstrating reliable precision. The average polling error was just -0.7 points, meaning their predictions were very close to the actual results overall. While there were some larger discrepancies in states like Texas and Nevada, Rasmussen’s polling was otherwise consistently on target, especially in high-profile states like Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Arizona.
Mitchell explained that he had Michigan polling at Harris +1, but he also believed that Trump’s support might be stronger in the state than the polls suggested. He felt his polling leaned about two points to the left, meaning Trump could potentially sweep the battleground states — which, of course, he did. Mitchell added that this polling accuracy was positive news and even suggested that his work may have influenced the industry, pushing other pollsters to improve their accuracy.
Mitchell addressed criticism from Nate Silver, who “downranked us as Republican pollsters,” despite Rasmussen not showing statistical bias. He discussed a controversy where leaked emails showed that Rasmussen had shared unreleased poll results with the Trump campaign, noting that Rasmussen shares unreleased polling with many people and even has a subscription service for it.
He highlighted the irony of Ann Seltzer, a respected pollster, releasing two conflicting polls: one showing Trump up by 18 and another with Harris up by 3. According to Mitchell, the Harris +3 poll was “communicated early to Democrat circles,” and they were “ecstatic and laughing and because they really needed hope, and they got a gold standard pollster handing them exactly the copium they needed.”
He suggested Seltzer’s move was an attempt to help Democrats maintain morale, even if it compromised her credibility, adding that her past polls showing Trump up double digits in Iowa reflected the reality. “So what was funny is she destroyed her credibility to help stop Trump, and she was actually a damn good pollster.”
Of course, there is quite a bit of anger aimed at the polling industry right now for getting this race so wrong again. It appears to be driven by people who don't want to see the truth, rather they want to be told what they want to hear.
"I think there's a lot of weak-willed people who kinda don't mind authority figures loosening their credibility to reinforce their views of reality," Mitchell said. "I think there's a lot less of those people on the right. Because I don't think my audience would say, 'Mark, we wanna see positive Trump numbers.' That's not what they want," he explained.
As for the Democrats’ hopes that the abortion issue would motivate their base and propel Kamala Harris to victory, that didn’t come close to panning out. Mitchell noted that there is only a small group of voters who prioritize abortion above all else, but overall, most Americans support strong limitations on abortion, even among those who identify as pro-choice.
So, what's going on in the polling industry? Mitchell compared the polling fails of the past few cycles to woke Hollywood, particularly in how external pressures and internal constraints can influence their work. He explains that just as Disney is driven by stockholder interests, they are also constrained by diversity and equity demands. According to Mitchell, pollsters are similarly affected by pressures from higher-ups. Mitchell says, “They wanna make money,” but are often hampered by “multiple layers of constraints and limitations,” such as hiring practices that prioritize diversity over experience, leading to subpar outcomes. He expands this comparison to the polling industry, stating that “Nate Cohn really wants to be an accurate pollster,” but is likely hindered by “some insane managing editor” who pushes a particular agenda. Mitchell believes that, despite the pollsters’ intentions, these pressures result in misleading or inaccurate data, likening it to how a movie made under such constraints can end up as “garbage.”
"Nate Cohn secretly wants to be accurate and isn't allowed to be," Mitchell believes.
When I asked Mitchell if he thinks there will be more honesty from the polling industry going forward, he didn't have high hopes. "I don't think so," he told me. "I think Nate Silver has a business model that doesn't require accuracy. I think 538's got bottomless money and will continue on as a propaganda operation."
Mitchell is doubtful that media organizations will hold themselves accountable for claiming that Kamala Harris was winning. He predicts that the real change will come from the rise of independent media, noting that “there were a gazillion streams" on election night, and likely more people watched independent streams than traditional cable news.
DON'T BELIEVE A DAMN WORD YOU READ ON THIS WEBSITE!
The reader is responsible for discerning the validity, factuality or implications of information posted here, be it fictional or based on real events. Moderators on this forum make every effort to review the material posted on this site however, it is not realistically possible for a one man team to manually review each and every one of the posts atomicbobs.com gets on a daily basis.
The content of posts on this site, including but not limited to links to other web sites, are the expressed opinion of the original poster and are in no way representative of or endorsed by the owners or administration of this website. The posts on this website are the opinion of the specific author and are not statements of advice, opinion, or factual information on behalf of the owner or administration of Atomicbobs. This site may contain adult language, if you feel you might be offended by such content, you should log off immediately.
Not all posts on this website are intended as truthful or factual assertion by their authors. Some users of this website are participating in internet role playing, with or without the use of an avatar. NO post on this website should be considered factual information on face value alone. Users are encouraged to
USE DISCERNMENT
and do their own follow up research while reading and posting on this website. Atomicbobs.com reserves the right to make changes to, corrections and/or remove entirely at any time posts made on this website without notice. In addition, Atomicbobs.com disclaims any and all liability for damages incurred directly or indirectly as a result of a post on this website.
This website implements certain security features in order to prevent spam and posting abuse. By making a post on this website you consent to any automated security checks required by our system to authenticate your IP address as belonging to an actual human. It is forbidden to make posts on this website from open proxy servers. By making a post on this website you consent to an automated one time limited port scan of your IP address which is required by our security system to validate the authenticity of your internet connection.
This site is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. You should not assume that this site is error-free or that it will be suitable for the particular purpose which you have in mind when using it. In no event shall Atomicbobs.com be liable for any special, incidental, indirect or consequential damages of any kind, or any damages whatsoever, including, without limitation, those resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether or not advised of the possibility of damage, and on any theory of liability, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of this site or other documents which are referenced by or linked to this site.
Some events depicted in certain posting and threads on this website may be fictitious and any similarity to any person living or dead is merely coincidental. Some other articles may be based on actual events but which in certain cases incidents, characters and timelines have been changed for dramatic purposes. Certain characters may be composites, or entirely fictitious.
We do not discriminate against the mentally ill!
Fair Use Notice:
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Users may make such material available in an effort to advance awareness and understanding of issues relating to civil rights, economics, individual rights, international affairs, liberty, science & technology, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.
At some point freedom of speech and copyright law merge. The following interpretation of "Fair Use" and subsequent posting policy were developed with the assistance of qualified legal council however, we are not lawyers and cannot offer you legal advise as to the limits of "Fair Use"
In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.
Though legally each situation is evaluated independently according to guidelines that were intentionally left open to interpretation, we believe generally this policy represents "Fair Use" of any such copyrighted material for the purposes of education and discussion.
You are responsible for what you "publish" on the internet. You must be sure any copyrighted material you choose to post for discussion on this forum falls within the limits of "Fair Use" as defined by the law.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe a post on this website falls outside the boundaries of "Fair Use" and legitimately infringes on yours or your clients copyright
we may be contacted concerning copyright matters at:
If you require a courier address please send a fax or email and we will provide you with the required information.
For expedited human review & removal of potential copyright violations we encourage users & copyright holders to utilize the "Report Copyright Violation" button that accompanies each post published on this website.
In accordance with section 512 of the U.S. Copyright Act our contact information has been registered with the United States Copyright Office. "Safe Harbor" noticing procedures as outlined in the DMCA apply to this website concerning all 3rd party posts published herein.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question. It is our strict policy to disable access to accounts of repeat copyright violators. We will also ban the IP address of repeat offenders from future posting on this website with or without a registered account.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Atomicbobs.com makes no claim of copyright on such material.
Please be aware any communications sent complaining about a post on this website may be posted publicly at the discretion of the administration.
---
DON'T BREAK THE LAW!
---
Other than that you can do / say whatever you want on this forum.
We reserve the right to block access to this website by any individual or organization at any time for any reason whatsoever or no reason at all.
| 
