This Pew poll seems to indicate support for Trump among Republicans is a lot lower than either the 2024 trial-heat polling or my general read of the media conventional wisdom suggests. Only 44% say he should run for president again. pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021… Image
Not really sure how to reconcile this all, to be honest. My hard prior is that, if the GOP had a primary today, Trump would win a resounding victory. But maybe that prior is wrong. When we find conflicting evidence the answer is usually somewhere in between!
Let’s do an exercise:

Poll 1: If the 2024 GOP primary was held today, with all the rules from 2016, and it was Trump v all the top GOP leaders who _might_ end up running, would he win?
Poll 2/2: If the 2024 GOP primary was held today, **and the winner was decided using ranked choice voting or another majority-winner method**, and it was Trump v all the top GOP leaders who _might_ end up running, would he win?
I think Trump would absolutely win in the first scenario, and would have a slightly lower probability but still be favored in the latter. But what I’m trying to get it is how much of these probabilities are bc he’s the maximalist GOP pick or bc of the rules of the primary system.
Another consideration is elites. In 2016, I bet a 50-50 superdelegate v delegate split would have hurt Trump relative to the actual system, whereas in 2024 I think it could _help_ him relative to levels of mass support, as elites seem more pro-Trump even than Republican voters.
There is a very strong media dynamic too. Anyone who can straddle the no-Trump and Trump-alternative wings of the GOP will instantly be criticized into submission on Fox News/OANN/Newsmax. I don’t think the outcome is really in doubt but it’s instructive to think through the 1/2
2/2 … factors that push outcomes away from what you’d expect based on good polling of attitudes.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with G. Elliott Morris

G. Elliott Morris Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @gelliottmorris

25 Sep
For fuck's sake... My aggregate in CA was 60% Keep Newsom if you just allocated undecideds and corrected for whether polls had the right weighting scheme. That's a 2 point error on vote share! Tiny! This is bad for SOME pollsters, not the industry. Jesus gelliottmorris.substack.com/p/polls-of-cal…
Contrary to popular belief, you don't have to dunk on the polls every time an election result is a little bit surprising to you -- or if you looked at the wrong polling averages
Observing error in a 3rd-party polling average (& 1 that ingested data that was basically withdrawn by a polling house and didn't allocate undecideds!) and then projecting that error onto "polls" as an industry-wide error is a huge analytical misstep IMO.
Read 9 tweets
25 Sep
Nothing in this Kagan essay is new or shocking, but I do find the cohesive packaging useful. The Constitution has no checks against proto-fascist factions abusing multiple branches of government for the pursuit of power. Something has to change—and soon. washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/…
We have seen multiple crises of the confluence of factionalism & US electoral +other institutions over the last year. Life-threatening covid-19 policy & 1/6 are only the most relevant examples. I have to wonder how bad people think it needs to get before we hit the tipping point.
I think the latter paragraph here from this excellent @jbouie article puts the pieces together very well. A faction of leaders holding power across levels and institutions of government can effectively circumvent the checks and balances of our government nytimes.com/2021/09/24/opi…
Read 4 tweets
15 Sep
Aaand there it is folks! Early vote-by-mail results in California's recall election are way ahead of tied-race benchmarks and signal an imminent victory for Governor Gavin Newsom, possibly by high double digits. I'm going to bed early tonight livevoterturnout.com/sandiegoca/Liv…
Listen to the (good) polls, folks!
where is my award for beating dave by one hundred and twenty thousand microseconds
Read 4 tweets
14 Sep
At this point, given the CA recall polling and VBM data, all we're looking for in the early vote tonight is confirmation of projected partisan distributions. Returned ballots are sufficiently Dem that we just need to assess loyalty + turnout. LA county VBM +25 Newsom would do it.
The very fuzzy math here is that early mail ballots statewide (+40) were about 10 points more pro-Biden than the final results (+30) in California in 2020, and LA County (+45) was about 15 pts more Biden than the whole state. So +55 early LA = +30 CA-wide in the end. +25 = tied.
You don't call an election just based on one county, of course. But Los Angeles cast 25% of CA's votes in 2020 so it's a good guide.

Other VBM benchmarks could be:

Recall +11 in Orange County (+19D 2020 VBM = 30 overall :: -11D VBM = 0)
Keep +3 in SD (+33D VBM = 30 :: 3D = 0)
Read 4 tweets
14 Sep
Blog post: Media coverage of California's recall election highlights big issues with popular poll aggregation models

gelliottmorris.substack.com/p/polls-of-cal…

FiveThirtyEight and RealClearPolitics are unable to capture modern outliers or the impacts of non-response & different weighting schemes
Expanding on what I've been saying here and elsewhere
Regardless of what happens in the election, the bottom line is that modern statistical methods can provide better analyses of polling data than the stuff available ten years ago, especially (but not only) because of recent problems in the polling industry. Time to do better.
Read 4 tweets
13 Sep
Here's my final update to this model of California recall polls. I'm calculating an aggregate that adjusts polls based on whether they use partisanship in their weighting schemes, and draws different trends for adjusted v unadjusted data. Newsom +18 +/- 10
gist.github.com/elliottmorris/…
The point of this project was to illustrate the different methods we can use to aggregate polling data — esp in how to improve existing popular averages that don't peer under the hood of how pollsters are processing their data, an increasingly important aspect of public polling.
So, note two things:

1. Popular averages magnify unlikely trends in public opinion by being whipsawed by data that is subject to higher standard errors than a decade ago (when the models were first made). Weighting by party flattens trends by decreasing nonresponse
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(