In the wake of Donald Trump’s resounding victory in the 2024 US presidential election, the nation’s pollsters find themselves under intense scrutiny for the third consecutive cycle. Despite implementing recalibrated methodologies aimed at more accurately gauging Trump’s support and restoring their own credibility, polling agencies are now being called upon to explain why their surveys consistently showed a deadlocked race between Trump and his Democratic rival, Vice President Kamala Harris.
Swing State Stumbles
Compounding the embarrassment for the polling industry, many experts had predicted a narrow Electoral College victory for Harris, projecting that she would eke out wins in a majority of the seven key battleground states: Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada. Instead, as of publication, Trump has emerged victorious in five of these states and holds leads in the remaining two.
Iowa Upset
A notable misfire came from a widely respected poll in the Republican stronghold of Iowa, published by the Des Moines Register just days before the election. The survey, conducted by esteemed pollster J Ann Selzer, indicated a three-point lead for Harris in the state, ostensibly fueled by a groundswell of support among women voters outraged by restrictions on abortion rights.
Democratic hopes were buoyed by the prospect that this surge could potentially spill over into neighboring Michigan and Wisconsin. However, when the votes were tallied, the poll proved to be a clear outlier, with Trump ultimately carrying Iowa by a commanding 55.9% to 42.7% margin.
Polling’s Fraught Future
The 2024 election debacle has reignited a broader debate about the role and reliability of polling in modern American politics. Historian Rick Perlstein, an expert on the rise of conservatism, took to social media to lament what he sees as a “very compromised enterprise,” urging people to start disregarding polls altogether.
One of the trippy things about the polling enterprise is [the] fraught relationship they have with traditional journalism, complaining of their breathless coverage that does not understand polling methodology, but also soliciting that coverage for business purposes.
Rick Perlstein, historian
Allan Lichtman, a political historian renowned for his “13 Keys” prediction system, also admitted that his forecast of a Harris victory was off the mark. Lichtman, who had previously predicted the winner of 11 out of the past 12 presidential elections, vowed to reassess both his methodology and the election outcome in an upcoming live broadcast.
Markets Outperform Polls
As pollsters grapple with yet another reckoning, some are pointing to the success of online betting markets as a sign that alternative forecasting methods may be more attuned to the electorate’s pulse. In the run-up to Election Day, five prominent betting platforms consistently gave Trump better-than-even odds of reclaiming the presidency, a sharp contrast to the neck-and-neck narrative peddled by most polls.
Polymarket, one of the betting sites that correctly anticipated a Trump win, touted its performance as proof of “the wisdom of markets over the polls, the media, and the pundits.” The company asserted that its high-volume, liquid prediction markets “consistently and accurately forecasted outcomes well ahead of all three.”
An Industry at a Crossroads
As the dust settles on another tumultuous election cycle, the polling industry finds itself at an inflection point. With public trust in polls seemingly eroding with each passing presidential race, experts and pundits alike are left to ponder whether the venerable institution of election polling can regain its footing and reclaim its place as a reliable barometer of the American political landscape.
For now, though, the postmortem will undoubtedly focus on how the pollsters, once again, missed the Trump effect – and what that portends for the future of an industry built on the promise of predictive precision in an increasingly unpredictable political age.
Democratic hopes were buoyed by the prospect that this surge could potentially spill over into neighboring Michigan and Wisconsin. However, when the votes were tallied, the poll proved to be a clear outlier, with Trump ultimately carrying Iowa by a commanding 55.9% to 42.7% margin.
Polling’s Fraught Future
The 2024 election debacle has reignited a broader debate about the role and reliability of polling in modern American politics. Historian Rick Perlstein, an expert on the rise of conservatism, took to social media to lament what he sees as a “very compromised enterprise,” urging people to start disregarding polls altogether.
One of the trippy things about the polling enterprise is [the] fraught relationship they have with traditional journalism, complaining of their breathless coverage that does not understand polling methodology, but also soliciting that coverage for business purposes.
Rick Perlstein, historian
Allan Lichtman, a political historian renowned for his “13 Keys” prediction system, also admitted that his forecast of a Harris victory was off the mark. Lichtman, who had previously predicted the winner of 11 out of the past 12 presidential elections, vowed to reassess both his methodology and the election outcome in an upcoming live broadcast.
Markets Outperform Polls
As pollsters grapple with yet another reckoning, some are pointing to the success of online betting markets as a sign that alternative forecasting methods may be more attuned to the electorate’s pulse. In the run-up to Election Day, five prominent betting platforms consistently gave Trump better-than-even odds of reclaiming the presidency, a sharp contrast to the neck-and-neck narrative peddled by most polls.
Polymarket, one of the betting sites that correctly anticipated a Trump win, touted its performance as proof of “the wisdom of markets over the polls, the media, and the pundits.” The company asserted that its high-volume, liquid prediction markets “consistently and accurately forecasted outcomes well ahead of all three.”
An Industry at a Crossroads
As the dust settles on another tumultuous election cycle, the polling industry finds itself at an inflection point. With public trust in polls seemingly eroding with each passing presidential race, experts and pundits alike are left to ponder whether the venerable institution of election polling can regain its footing and reclaim its place as a reliable barometer of the American political landscape.
For now, though, the postmortem will undoubtedly focus on how the pollsters, once again, missed the Trump effect – and what that portends for the future of an industry built on the promise of predictive precision in an increasingly unpredictable political age.
