In the weeks leading up to the 2024 presidential election, polls indicated a close race between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, with voters evenly split across battleground states. There was momentum in Harris’s favor towards the end of the campaign, with some forecasters even predicting her as the marginally more likely victor. However, in the end, Trump won all swing states and is poised to win the popular vote, a feat not achieved by a Republican nominee in 20 years. The polls failed to capture the strength and breadth of Trump’s support across key demographics, leading to questions about their accuracy.
Experts in the polling industry have varying opinions on the accuracy of the polls in the 2024 election. Some, like Patrick Murray of Monmouth University Polling Institute, believe that the polls told the story of a stable, uncertain race that could go either way by a few points, which ultimately proved accurate. Others, like John Zogby of John Zogby Strategies, acknowledge that while polls did not capture precise numbers, they accurately reflected demographic trends such as substantial gender and age gaps in support for the candidates. Overall, there is a feeling that the polls provided valuable information for understanding the electorate, despite not being perfect predictors of the outcome.
Experts like Mark Penn, Chairman and CEO of Stagwell, believe that the polls were generally good but needed to adjust by another 2 points for greater accuracy. Chris Jackson of Ipsos disagrees with the notion that the polls were wrong, pointing out that multiple polls indicated a potential victory for Trump based on voter turnout. Christopher Wlezien of the University of Texas at Austin notes that polls understated Trump’s support, leading to incorrect predictions in some states, but overall performed well considering the close nature of the election.
While the national polls and swing state polls were relatively close to the actual outcomes of the 2024 election, there was a consistent underestimate of support for Donald Trump. The polls seemed to miss the mark in capturing the full extent of Trump’s support, leading to questions about the methodology used by pollsters. Christopher Borick of Muhlenberg College Institute of Public Opinion notes that some new pollsters, such as AtlasIntel, had a strong performance in this election cycle, indicating a potential shift in polling accuracy among different organizations.
Pollsters and experts agree that pre-election polling is a challenging endeavor, as small errors in responses from a limited sample size can have significant consequences in predicting close races. There is a sense that the public and pollsters may have unrealistic expectations for the accuracy of polling data, especially in predicting the outcomes of tight election races. Despite the challenges, polls did accurately capture the sentiments of the electorate leading up to the 2024 election, highlighting concerns about the economy, immigration, and approval ratings of the incumbent president.
In conclusion, while the polls in the 2024 election were not perfect and underestimated support for Donald Trump, they provided valuable insights into the demographic trends and concerns of the electorate. Experts emphasize the need to focus on what the polls tell us about ourselves and others, rather than expecting precision in predicting election outcomes. The polling industry will need to continue refining its methodologies to address factors such as likely voter models, weighting algorithms, and the influence of “shy Trump voters” to improve accuracy in future elections.
