Should We Trust the 2024 Election Polls?

Plus: A listener asks the editors if the prospect of Supreme Court nominations is reason enough to favor Trump over Harris in this year’s presidential election?

1x 1.1x 1.25x 1.5x 2x 3x

:15 :15

Download

Should We Trust the 2024 Election Polls?

HD Video Download

In this week's The Reason Roundtable, editors Matt Welch, Nick Gillespie, and Peter Suderman welcome back special guest Stephanie Slade to chat about the latest in polling results and the shape of the electorate two weeks ahead of the presidential election.

02:16—Latest in polling data two weeks out from the presidential election

33:04—Weekly listener question

44:15—Takeaways from Vice President Kamala Harris' interview with Fox News' Bret Baier.

51:23—This week's cultural recommendations

 

Mentioned in this podcast:

"End Times" by Liz Wolfe

"To Get Through This Election, Get Some Fresh Air" by Joe Lancaster

"How Are Reason Staffers Voting in 2024?"

"Donald Trump and Kamala Harris Keep Making Economically Illiterate Promises" by John Stossel

"Mark Robinson Files Frivolous Lawsuit Against CNN and a Local Musician" by Joe Lancaster

"Will Trump or Harris Win the Working-Class Vote?" by Nick Gillespie

"J.D. Vance Completes Trump's Ideological Takeover of the Republican Party" by Matt Welch

"Patrick Ruffini: Why Blacks and Hispanics Are Turning to Trump" by Nick Gillespie

"Must Libertarians Care About More Than the State?" by Stephanie Slade

"Can Free Markets Win Votes in the New GOP?" by Stephanie Slade

"Is There a Future for Fusionism?" by Stephanie Slade

"Foxy Kamala" by Liz Wolfe

 

Upcoming Events:

Reason Speakeasy: Musa al-Gharbi, October 24, 2024

 

Send your questions to [e-mail]. Be sure to include your social media handle and the correct pronunciation of your name.

 

Today's sponsors:

• Qualia Senolytic: Have you heard about senolytics yet? It's a class of ingredients discovered less than 10 years ago, and it's being called the biggest discovery of our time for promoting healthy aging and enhancing your physical prime. Your goals in your career and beyond require productivity. But let's be honest: The aging process is not our friend when it comes to endless energy and productivity. As we age, everyone accumulates "senescent" cells in their body. Senescent cells cause symptoms of aging, such as aches and discomfort, slow workout recoveries, and sluggish mental and physical energy associated with that "middle age" feeling. Also known as "Zombie Cells," they are old and worn out and not serving a useful function for our health anymore, but they are taking up space and nutrients from our healthy cells. Much like pruning the yellowing and dead leaves off a plant, Qualia Senolytic removes those worn-out senescent cells to allow for the rest of your cells to thrive in the body. Take it just two days a month. The formula is non-GMO, vegan, and gluten-free, and the ingredients are meant to complement one another, factoring in the combined effect of all ingredients together. Resist aging at the cellular level and try Qualia Senolytic. Go to Qualialife.com/ROUNDTABLE for up to 50 percent off and use code ROUNDTABLE at checkout for an additional 15 percent off. For your convenience, Qualia Senolytic is also available at select GNC locations near you.
• ZBiotics. ZBiotics Pre-Alcohol Probiotic Drink is the world's first genetically engineered probiotic. It was invented by Ph.D. scientists to tackle rough mornings after drinking. Make ZBiotics your first drink of the night, drink responsibly, and you'll feel your best tomorrow. Go to zbiotics.com/ROUNDTABLE to get 15 percent off your first order when you use ROUNDTABLE at checkout. ZBiotics is backed with a 100 percent money-back guarantee so if you're unsatisfied for any reason, they'll refund your money, no questions asked.

Audio production by Ian Keyser

Assistant production by Hunt Beaty

Music: "Angeline," by The Brothers Steve

• Video Editor: Ian Keyser
• Producer: Hunt Beaty

What are we consuming this week?

Nick Gillespie

• The Franchise

Peter Suderman

• Slow Horses, Season 4

Stephanie Slade

• Friedrich Hayek: A Biography by Alan Ebenstein

Matt Welch

• Sturgill Simpson, live at Forest Hill Stadium

---

Comments

[Dillinger]

>>Should We Trust the 2024 Election Polls?

should you have overtly trusted them every day until Nate Silver sided with credibility?

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

Why does it feel as if this questioned is solely being asked to help give a greater margin allowance to the fortification.

[sarcasmic]

Because you project your bad faith onto everyone you hate.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

You've had a couple of badly retarded days. Why not take some days off, try to stay sober, come back when you're not broken.

[Don't look at me!]

It’s too late.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

He doesn't go full retard, he stays full retard.

[Mother's Lament]

There's always a new peak with Mount Sarcasmic.

[Chumby]

Each Sarc in the multiverse has its own list.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

If an infinite number of sarcs are typing on reason, will they even post something intelligent?

[5.56]

Will a random number generator that knows only 0 and 1 ever give you a 0.6 if you call it infinite times?

[LIBtranslator]

Does anyone notice that nobody mentions how much campaign spending the looter Kleptocracy factions are raking in and forking over? The Nixon anti-Libertarian Law of 1971 shamelessly subsidizes looter candidates while Herbert Hoover's apprentice Elon Muscles in on vote auctioning confident that Palito, Long Dong and the Three Trump Stooges are running the entire Suprema Corte. Tuccille's dad mentioned the spending-to-votes ratio back when the LP was uninvaded. Today, only Chase Oliver spurns that math. Biden outspent the nazis by 3 to 1 and beat the Orange MAGAt while women voters ignored neutered Jo. How goes it now?

[Mother's Lament]

Alright, at this point old Hank is just random word generating. I bet that even HE can't make sense out of what he just wrote.

[Gaear Grimsrud]

Still waiting for hot Nazi chicks bikini pics Hank.

[SQRLSY]

Why does it feel as if this questioned (could that simply be a “question” perhaps-maybe?) is solely being asked to help give a greater margin (of) allowance to the Trumpanzees Gone Apeshit to question the next case of the “Stolen Erections”? Spermy Daniels wants to KNOW, damn-shit-all!

Ass Sung by Spermy Daniels, AKA Dolly Hard-On

I'm waiting for the next "October Surprise" by "Team R", in which the machinations of the Lizard People are AT LONG LUST revealed for All to See!!!

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/10/15/october-suprise-elections-00183505

Joe Lean, Joe Mean, Joe Lean, Joe Mean,
I’m beggin’ you, please don’t take His Elections!
Joe Lean, Joe Mean, Joe Lean, Joe Mean,
Please don’t crush My Man’s Erections!

Your polls are woke beyond compare,
You’re the VERY best at sniffing hair!
Labor unions flock to your door,
Your pork barrels, they all adore!
You tell them what they want to hear,
Bidin’ yer time, to throw My Man out on His ear!

My Man still grabs my pussy,
Along with many another hussy!
Don’t steal my Man’s erection!
Else He’ll sink into much dejection!
I am still His Special Queen,
Specially glazed in Vaseline!

Joe Lean, Joe Mean, Joe Lean, Joe Mean,
I’m beggin’ you, please don’t take His Elections!
Joe Lean, Joe Mean, Joe Lean, Joe Mean,
Please don’t crush My Man’s Erections!

You could have most ANY hair to sniff,
Yet you keep My Man from getting stiff!
My Man, He needs to be pussy-grabbing,
Yet you call His Lies; prevent confabbing!
Joe Lean, Joe Mean, leave My Man alone!
I’m the only, lonely one who needs His Bone!

You don’t know twat He means to me,
He stands on me and takes a pee!
Upon my ancient flower,
He gives a Golden Shower!
To Him, should go ALL Power!
Upon Him, I bestow a blow-job,
To Joe-Bob, He’ll send a snow-job!

Joe Lean, Joe Mean, Joe Lean, Joe Mean,
I’m beggin’ you, please don’t take His Elections!
Joe Lean, Joe Mean, Joe Lean, Joe Mean,
Please don’t crush My Man’s Erections!

HELP me get the word out!!!
#SingItForUsSpermyDaniels

[Mother's Lament]

Hey Hank! Your boy is posting it again.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

Is that what Federalist and John Solomon told you to think?

[Mother's Lament]

Is that what The View and Joltin Joe Scarborough told you to think?

Haha, just kidding. I know Media Matters sends you your talking points at around 9:30 in the morning.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

Weak. Your fifty-cent boss should demand a refund.

But, quelle surprise, here you come to white-knight for your team.

Do you really think anyone actually *likes* you around here?

[Chumby]

Is that what your weak fifty-cent boss told you to say?

[chemjeff radical individualist]

Is that what Putin told you to say?

[Chumby]

I usually get my instructions from Dima.
Can you ask your paymaster to show up? Your takes are weak. Need something better to bother with. Thanks.

[Fire up the Woodchippers! (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

Pedo Jeffy is rapidly falling apart. So let’s keep pushing him. I imagine hilarity ensues.

[Rick James]

Ok, Stephanie gives a rather circuitous answer about what she thinks will happen if Trump gets elected, makes some statements that were difficult to track on the right hating elite institutions because they've all been capture and... well the left feels that way about... the supreme court and the supreme court has not been won by the right legitimately, and then I think her final point was her fear that if Trump gets elected, there will be violent riots in the street.

I wasn't sure ultimately what her point was in relation to the specific question asked by the "listener" but that was the summary that I was able to pull without listening to her answer two or three times. Gillespie responds... with what sounds like a tone of mockery, attempting to confirm, "So your prediction is there will be violent, burning riots in the street if Trump wins."

Now, again, it's difficult to read from a tonal aspect, but does... does Nick really think the left is not capable of violent, burning riots or was 2019-2023 (like the renaissance) something that happened to other people?

[LIBtranslator]

Note to foreign readers: Rickie is channeling one of the dozen more recent "last elections" written up as "1900, or The Last President" by original Trumpanzista Ingersoll Lockwood. In it, Democrats with "soft negroese intonation" win the election, allow pensions for wounded rebs, praise Germany, abolish the tax on plant leaves and blow up the Capitol dome! Free at Gutenberg.org alongside the Little Baron Trump books.

[Rick James]

You strike me as the kind of guy who would be handing out Lyndon Larouche pamphlets in the late 80s/early 90s.

[Mother's Lament]

Lyndon Larouche was handing out Hank pamphlets in the late 80s/early 90s.

[Fire up the Woodchippers! (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

Foreign readers? As if anyone who learned English as a second language would have the first clue what you’re babbling about.

[Mother's Lament]

If they do then maybe they can explain it to the English as a first language readers here.

[DesigNate]

That’s our Hank!

(Cue laugh track)

[Use the Schwartz]

“So your prediction is there will be violent, burning riots in the street if Trump wins.”

In any case, I always appreciate it when Bad Actors self-identify.

[Rick James]

The entire COVID era took care of that.

[Gaear Grimsrud]

There will absolutely be violent, burning riots in the street if Trump wins. But Reason will call them peaceful demonstrations in daily articles about unmarked white vans.

[Chumby]

Koreans on rooftops should be mobilizing.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

[Uncle Jay]

"Should We Trust the 2024 Election Polls?"

No, because most pollsters are ardent leftists who only poll in liberal enclaves.

[Mother's Lament]

Yes, but then if you take into account the fraud factor, they are only off by 10 percent.

[Chumby]

Just the ones showing Kamala doing well.

[LIBtranslator]

So that job for Steph at One America News fell through?

[creech]

Just who, commenting on this site, is going to vote based on "what the polls say?"

[Mother's Lament]

Mtrueman.

[LIBtranslator]

Sharknado global warmunism, which demands that Dems ban electricity with bigoted violence no less fervent than that with which the Klan-GOP coalition seeks to ban plant leaves, mushrooms, cacti and women's individual rights--is the 900-pound Long Dong in the room. The problem is that nobody believes for a minute the Dems can ban electricity and not be replaced by the LP. But reality has proven that Christian National Socialism can and did pack the supreme court with coercive mystical nazis capable of enslaving fertile women.

[Chumby]

About half the human beings that the death cult worshipping the magical birth canal fairy have killed were female.

[Gaear Grimsrud]

Sounds like girl bullying to me.

[Mother's Lament]

It's not bullying when Hank does it. He was just making sure his first girlfriend knew all her options and was making the right choice. See, he didn't want her to ruin her life, being held back by a kid and all.

[Eeyore]

If you include the last 20 years of China - females have been disproportionately been impacted.

[Outlaw Josey Wales]

The Hand Maids have all been doused in DDT. Doom ensured.

[Sevo, 5-30-24, embarrassment]

Yes, we should trust the polls to be largely biased against Trump as they always are.

[DesigNate]

No, we shouldn’t trust the polls as they’ve been consistently wrong.

Yes, if Trump wins there will be rioting. Just like in 2016.

SC picks are a decent enough reason to choose him over Harris. Because as bad as Kavanaugh and Barrett could prove to be in the future, they can’t hold a candle to Brown, Kagen, or whoever Harris would pack the court with. (Sorry Hank, getting an abortion doesn’t trump all the other things at stake with a Harris presidency.)

[Ersatz]

Sotomayor should have at least gotten an (dis)honorable mention there...

[DesigNate]

Fair enough.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

Trust the national polls? Well, the national polls are meaningless anyway regardless of their accuracy. All of the swing state polls say basically "it's tied to within the margin of error", which sounds about right.

[Commenter_XY]

Yes, the race is currently a statistical tie.
Yes, there are only ~10 states where the election is undecided.

Right now, we are at an inflection point. The American electorate is moving toward a decision, and the polls show this. The broad movement is in one direction, looking across polling. It is moving away from Team D. Previously 'safe' Senate races are tight (OH, WI, MI). More movement in House races, too. RCP shows it, Silver shows it.

Absent a candidate misstep (always a possibility with The Donald), the election is slipping away from VP Harris. The final electoral result might not be so close.

For VP Harris to turn things around, she must speak extemporaneously and state her case. But she doesn't have that ability; Kamala extemporaneous speaking ability borders on incoherence.

Helene might prove to have been the October surprise.

[Social Justice is neither]

When every in the tank for Harris pollster can only get her to the bottom half of the margin of error and sinking while still maintaining some shred of credibility you have a problem. But we know fraud is on the table again so you leftists have that going for you.

[Bill Falcon]

Never mind the bollocks, Vote Trump. no more cultural marxists running the media, academia, NGOs (total grifters pos) and the federal govt.. Deport them all..Ukraine has lots of room now and would be a home coming in many ways. Along the way, end the Fed, shut down every govt agency created after 1960, the patriot act, and all DIE programs.

The Dems declared war on Catholics and Ethnic Americans a long time ago..old world grudges I suppose for many of them. Catholics are not going to take it anymore. Fight, Fight, Fight

[Vernon Depner]

Are they actually doing polls anymore? Who answers phone calls from unknown numbers these days? I suspect they're just making shit up.

[Chumby]

A few years ago, I used to do the phone polls and always answered in favor of the most progressive candidate/position until those calls became near daily. Now I mostly get “I am Mike Wilson with Healthcare Benefits” calling from Pakistan.

[Uomo Del Ghiaccio]

As an independent with libertarian leanings, I find this election particularly disgusting. While I typically dislike the two uni-party candidates, these are more distasteful than normal. I realize that one of two awful excuses for candidates will become the next president.

While I couldn't bring myself to cast my vote for either one of them, nor my typical outlet vote for the Libertarian candidate, but this cycles candidate is a poor representative of the party that far too often is rooted in an unrealistic dream that will never achieve any traction in our lifetimes. Jacob Hornberger is as delusional as Chase Oliver and the "Libertan" is just a opportunist. I believe that every citizen should vote for the best candidate that is available, in my State RFK Jr was still on the ballot, so I picked a candidate who is no longer running and has endorsed a different candidate simply because he is far better than the alternatives.

I found it interesting the argument that if the courts go right that it will cause conflict, however contrasting this notion with the reality that the left owns a near monopoly of the vast majority of the rest of the government, government agencies, corporate media, entertainment, social media, education, and the list goes on and on.

So your argument is essentially that is the right hold any tiny aspect of power, the the left will revolt, so it's better to give the left complete power and eliminate the right entirely. It's basically the same argument many anti-trump people make if you read in-between the lines.

While Trump is crass and narcissistic, the very worst parts of Trump are not Trump himself or his supporters, but rather the reactions to and actions against Trump by anti-trump media (which is essentially the near entirety of the corporate media), partisan agency leadership and management (who have become extremely overt, so it makes you wonder what they are capable of doing hidden behind the curtain).

Realizing that Trump or Harris will be the next president, that both will likely increase deficit, fail to balance the budget, and usher in the decline or demise of our grand experiment we call a country. I'm not a proponent of the collapseitarian thought exercise as the probabilities that power will fall into the hands of people who are even worse it pretty high.

If you factor in all aspect of society, including the lack of an objective non-partisan media, the lack of efficient government agencies, the reality that there are partisan actors in these government agencies. The tendencies toward authoritarianism of the candidates and their parties and potential cabinet members. The question is which of these two bozos pose the least amount of risk, that is more likely to decrease the amount of increase towards the final curtain.

I have to begrudgingly admit that Trump is less of a risk than Harris is. I also know more about what Trump thinks than where Harris stands. The key is don't trust the media or campaigns to present an un-biased account, but rather biased propaganda. Instead, find the actual clips to hear the questions, the context, instead of the heavily clipped sound bites that are taken completely out of context.

Essentially we will be getting progressively worse under Trump, but not as fast of a decline under Harris. Additionally, we will have less of a risk of getting into a war with Trump than Harris, and Trump would have less authoritarian tactics to strip our freedoms than under Harris.

However we will have more internal conflicts and riots under Trump than under Harris. We would see a continuation of targeted prosecutions against political rivals. The political attacks by the corporate media would increase against Trump if elected, but if Harris is elected the corporate media will do everything to protect her by burying anything that is less than flattering.

If Trump wins, the left will push to eliminate the electoral college in order to increase the power of the cities and large states. If Harris wins the left will push to pack the supreme court.

If Harris wins the left will attempt to make abortions legal nationwide and will not offer any restrictions. If Trump wins, some of the right will push for a national ban on abortion, but Trump and a small majority of Republicans are likely to resist it and leave the issue at the state level, if for not other reason than reducing the effect on elections. I feel that the majority of people would support restrictions after 12-15 weeks, and don't support either a total ban nor unrestricted abortions.

Regarding trusting polls, the simple answer is "Don't".

[Quo Usque Tandem]

My considerations for voting, regardless of the candidates:

1. Which will cause me the least damage, in terms of more [or less] regulation, bureaucracy, and government overreach? Will one party possibly mean more or less government in my life?

2. Who will have the least [negative] impact my personal freedoms?

3. Which party is least likely to get us into another war, or to serve as a proxy to such?

Of course there are other considerations, but those guide me. Regardless of who the particular candidate is.

[(Impeach Robert L. Peters) Weigel's Cock Ring]

The betting markets aren't always right (they wrongly thought Hillary was a virtual shoo-in, just like almost everyone at the time did). But they usually are.

And with each passing day, Trump's lead in the betting markets keeps slowly but steadily getting bigger and bigger.

[Bill Falcon]

So Steve is voting Harris despite being a Catholic? Come on Steve seriously? Dems hate Catholics and esp Ethnic Catholics like Italians...get on the Trump Train Steve...no open borders, no more funding little Trotsky (Zelensky) and no sexually mutilating mentally ill kids...you good with that?

Never mind the Bollocks Vote Trump as the phrase says that is going around ....

[Peter Kreeft taught me LOGIC, BEWARE !!!!!!!]

NO. and in retrpspect Nate Silver's terrible polling proves it. He himself admits he did --- I think he said scores of 'scenarios';-- and it came out about 50-50
If you go to the Wm Briggs site "statistician to the stars" you'll see
Phd in Statistics analyze with understanding.
As an amateur, I think Nate was wrong because of what he assumed must be important to people. Abortion, homosexuality, trans --- all actually disgust the general populace.

[Peter Kreeft taught me LOGIC, BEWARE !!!!!!!]

I see Nate Silver trashed PhD William Briggs with a truly stupid comment
"This dumbass seemingly has a PhD but doesn't understand how probability works. If a forecast is near 50/50 it's gonna cross the 50-yard-line a bunch of times."

Even I can see Nate is wrong . It crosses the line BOTH WAYS and invalidates the entire set of assumptions, NATE

If you poll based on what type of shoes Kamala wears vs what kind Trump wears it will go both ways but it will mean NOTHING and the both ways should tell you that.

[Peter Kreeft taught me LOGIC, BEWARE !!!!!!!]

Dear Nate Silver....."Most notably, that included the revelation that Harris’ internal polling never showed her up on Donald Trump in key states " Am I to conclude that they know how to poll and you do not 🙂