It’s been an avalanche … of Legos … cartwheeling and screaming … about the last report.
Speaking of RMG Research
Napolitan News Service sponsors RMG Research polls. I just ran across this in a Napolitan News Service report:
This Napolitan News Service survey of 781 Likely Voters was conducted online by Scott Rasmussen on September 18-20, 2024 and has a margin of error of +/- 3.5. Field work for the survey was conducted by RMG Research, Inc.
First, I really don’t trust online surveys. Maybe the technology has improved, but getting a random sample of honest answers, already a difficult task, sounds even harder when it’s all online and features a bevy of malicious trolls.
Second, Scott Rasmussen is of Rasmussen Reports, and Rasmussen Reports is not rated by FiveThirtyEight. They are listed, but only in the section reserved for pollsters whose performance is so godawful that they’re not worth rating.
So keep that in mind in the future when seeing RMG Research, despite their rating of 2.3/3.
Speaking of Bias
When I state a pollster is known to lean left or right, I generally mean someone in the media has stated so. Most often it’s FiveThirtyEight, which is, I hope, working from solid numbers of previous elections to deduce a result leading to that statement.
When I say observed to lean, I mean that my impression of some of some pollster’s results is that they lean one way or the other in that they diverge from the general range of numbers. This doesn’t address the question of deliberate skew, as that’s a bit impossible in the light – or dark – of a lack of access to “the truth”. Maybe the pollster in question, such as Morning Consult (1.9) or unrated ActiVote, has a better grip on reality than do highly rated pollsters.
Nor does a lean skew all of a pollster’s results. Think deceit, a desire not to be identified as skewing results because they’re trying to persuade voters that the herd is over there instead of over here. After all, despite its irrelevance to democracy, people do want to be part of the majority, and some will change their vote, without reference to their best judgement, just to be able to say honestly that they voted for a winner.
To be clear, there’s no fidelity to democracy in such actions or even desire, but it does happen and, within the context of the emotional needs of a given person, is even rational.
But it’s not honest.
And Now For The Doxie Racing Numbers
- Michigan remains understandably popular, with
fourfive pollsters gathering numbers and, presumably, espresso at the coffee shops. Suffolk University (2.9) is giving Rep Slotkin (D-MI) only a two point lead, 45%-43%, over former Representative and right-wing extremist Mike Rogers (R-MI), which is a bit surprising for a highly respectable pollster. This is in contrast to the previous Michigan update in which Quinnipiac University (2.8) gave Slotkin a five point lead.Emerson College (2.9) is giving Slotkin a 47%-42% lead, much like QU, which is not as tight but still a little close. Morning Consult (1.9), observed to lean left, seems to be measuring some other race with a 51%-37% score, or a 14 point lead for Slotkin. Finally, on the other end of the scale, Rogers campaign-sponsored Tarrance Group (1.6) has Rogers down by only two at 49%-47%.And, at the last moment, top-rated The New York Times/Siena College (3.0) has Slotkin up by five, 47%-42%. Some of these polls have margins larger than the gap between the politicians, rendering them statistical dead heats, but Slotkin being consistently ahead renders her the favorite. - The New York Times/Siena College (3.0) thinks Arizona’s Rep Gallego’s (D-AZ) lead over Kari Lake (R-AZ) for the soon-to-be open Senate seat is only six at 49%-43%. Has something changed? A Beacon Research/Shaw & Co. Research / Fox News Poll (2.8) has Gallego up 55%-42%, which is 13 points, and Marist College (2.9) gives Gallego a 54%-44% lead. These are both well ahead TNYT/SC, suggesting the latter are underestimating Gallego’s support in Arizona. Then again, Suffolk University (2.9) is also calling it a very close race with a result of 47%-41%.
- Montana’s Senator Tester (D-MT) may be in trouble as RMG Research (2.3) measures the Senator as behind his challenger, Tim Sheehy (R-MT), 50%-43%. A previous RMG Research poll gave the Senator a five point lead, suggesting a large swing in Montana. Is it believable? See above, where I discuss issues with RMG Research.
- Senator Casey (D-PA) in Pennsylvania has a lead over Republican David McCormick (R-PA?), according to Muhlenberg College Institute of Public Opinion (2.8), of 48%-43%, suggesting a tighter race than some recent polls. RMG Research (2.3) has a similar result of 50%-44% for the Senator, while Susquehanna Polling & Research (2.3) is a little bigger with a 48%-40% result, and Beacon Research/Shaw & Company Research / Fox News (2.8) is giving the Senator a 53%-44% lead. From a Fox News perspective:
In the Pennsylvania Senate race, Democratic candidate Bob Casey has a 9-point lead over Republican challenger David McCormick (53% to 44% among both registered and likely voters). McCormick has narrowed the gap by 4 points since July when he was down by 13 (55-42%).
But from my perspective of many polls, this is just confirmation that Casey has built a strong lead, and, minus the unexpected, should retain it. I think Fox News is just trying to apply lipstick to an unpalatable result; that previous result they are referencing was an outlier.
- RMG Research (2.3) shows challenger Bernie Moreno (R-OH) in Ohio ahead of Senator Brown (D-OH), 46%-48%. Will Ohio citizens discharge a known quantity in Brown, free of scandal, for an unqualified Republican who seems to think that it’s unnecessary to present good arguments, and instead just divide the electorate into bite sized pieces? See above, where I discuss issues with RMG Research.
Also in the right-leaning camp is unknown ActiVote, who gives Moreno a 51%-49% lead. As those numbers add up to 100%, I have to wonder if there’s no undecideds left in Ohio. Seems unlikely. Also, this is disturbing:
The poll was among 400 likely voters, has an average expected error of 4.9%, and was in the field between August 16, 2024 and September 22, 2024 with a median field date of September 4.
400 is quite a small sample size for such a large State, leading to that abnormally large expected error, and the lengthy period of data collection is really not encouraging at all, at least to my untrained mind. I’m really having my doubts about ActiVote. Maybe Lowell Center (2.9) should be encouraged to poll Ohio.
Finally, Top-rated The New York Times/Siena College (3.0) is giving the lead to the Senator, albeit not as large as some, with 47%-43%. This I shall trust a bit more, as the variables are considerably smaller, and the results correlate more with other respectable pollsters, with the singular exception of RMG Research.
- In my last update for Maryland I speculated a dash of scandal might make this a tight race, but so far that’s not true: The Washington Post/University of Maryland Center for Democracy and Civic Engagement (2.5) is giving County Executive Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), who is the alleged perpetrator of the scandal, a 51%-40% lead over former Governor Larry Hogan (R-MD), which is one of the larger leads I’ve seen for this race. Still, WaPo has a comment:
Maryland has not elected a Republican to the Senate in four decades and President Joe Biden won here by 33 percentage points in 2020. Yet, Hogan’s track record as a pragmatic, two-term governor with an anti-Trump brand — and a history of pulling off a big upset — has kept the race relatively competitive.
Until the former Governor concedes, I think this is a race.
- Does this make Nebraska even hotter? Candidate Dan Osborn (I-NE) sponsored a poll by SurveyUSA (a more than respectable 2.8 rating) which finds Mr Osborn now leads Senator Fischer (R-NE), 45%-44%. That’s the first lead I’ve seen, and of course is a statistical dead heat. With many pollsters there’d be concern that the pollster is trying to please their sponsor, but SurveyUSA is too highly rated, in my opinion, to make that mistake. This is in contrast with the last poll I saw, which was Global Strategy Group (1.8) sponsored by the group Retire Career Politicians, aligned with the Independent Party, and gave Fischer a one point lead. While one can argue about a single poll, what is inarguable is that the collection of Nebraska polls over time shows Osborn catching up with Fischer, and now with the momentum. This will be a tense place for the next month.
-
You thought I was kidding? Far Right Extremist.
(Senator Ricketts (R-NE) On The Issues summary)The Nebraska special election to the Senate for the seat of the former Senator Sasse (R-NE), who resigned for another job, also was polled by SurveyUSA, and the Democrats are not happy here: appointed Senator and far-right extremist Pete Ricketts (R-NE) leads challenger Preston Love, Jr (D-NE) 53%-35%. For that matter, Osborn may be endorsed by the Democrats, but he remains an independent.
- In Florida, unknown pollster The Bullfinch Group is giving Senator Scott (R-FL) a small lead of 46%-44% over former Rep Mucarsel-Powell (D-FL). Too bad the pollster is unrated.
- Senator Cruz (R-TX) of Texas has a four point lead, 49%-45%, over Rep Allred (D-TX), according to Emerson College (2.9). The pollster also notes:
Voters were asked if the current abortion law in Texas, which bans abortion after approximately six weeks of pregnancy, is too strict, not strict enough, or about right. A majority of Texas voters (53%) think the current abortion law is too strict, 31% think the law is about right, and 16% think it is not strict enough.
If Rep Allred can connect with that majority, he may be able to pass Senator Cruz down the stretch.
- The New York Times/Siena College (3.0) is giving Wisconsin’s Senator Baldwin (D-WI) a lead over challenger Eric Hovde (D-WI?) of 50%-43%, conforming to other polls of Wisconsin.
- In New Jersey, Republican candidate Curtis Bashaw (R-NJ) has a new video ad out, which, according to the New Jersey Globe, opens with
“My opponent thinks that because I am a Republican, I fit into this box. Well, good luck trying to define me. I’m a small business owner who built my hotel company budget by budget. I’ve been with my husband for 22 years. I believe our border needs to be secure and I’m pro parent. And yes, I’m pro-choice, and believe that women, not the government, should decide what’s best for them. I’m Curtis Bashaw, and I approve this message because I believe we need to put principle over politics.”
I doubt Bashaw will beat Democratic candidate Rep Kim (D-NJ) for Senator Menendez’s (I-NJ) seat, but this ad functions as a reminder that using sexual preferences as a proxy for political stance is a mistake, a mistake made by both sides. On the right, homosexuality is frantically rejected by religious elements despite the decades long debate that ended, emphatically, with the acceptance of gay marriage and its related Obergefell v. Hodges SCOTUS decision. On the left, the attempted packaging of all the various flavors of sexual preference into the alphabet soup of LGBT…., and then to bind them together as yet another identity with allegiance to the left, betrays their mistaken understanding of reality, and the beleaguered but continued existence of the Log Cabin Republicans group suggests that, despite the zealous, if arbitrary, rejection of homosexuality on the right, conservative political sensibilities are not tied to sexual preferences. When this imaginary tie is finally denied by the Republicans, then we’ll know that they’ve taken another step back to political respectability.
Mr Bashaw, along with former governor Hogan (R-MD) and a few others I’ve mentioned in these pages and now have forgotten, may and should be the future of the Republican Party, while current elected officials such as Gaetz, Gosar, Green, Boebert, McConnell, Tuberville, as well as the Trump family and many others, should be ejected from the Republican Party, all for the improved health of the United States.
Final Thoughts
Nyah. I’m too young for that.
