{"id":46170,"date":"2026-10-28T17:30:23","date_gmt":"2026-10-28T22:30:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/huewhite.com\/umb\/?p=46170"},"modified":"2026-10-28T17:33:45","modified_gmt":"2026-10-28T22:33:45","slug":"the-2026-senate-campaign-updates-48","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/huewhite.com\/umb\/2026\/10\/28\/the-2026-senate-campaign-updates-48\/","title":{"rendered":"The 2026 Senate Campaign: Updates"},"content":{"rendered":"

THE FREIGHT TRAIN MAY BE ALMOST HERE<\/strong><\/p>\n

It’s less than a week to Election Day. I think it’d be repetitive to note that President Trump is a drag on Republican candidates, but in inverse correlation to the redness of their State. However, there’s a chronological decay factor involved in which, as time progresses, Trump supporters become disaffected and drop out of the movement.<\/p>\n

The realization that they’re associating and supporting a grifter and incompetent can be discouraging, although the perceived elevated social position will slow many down in leaving the … group.<\/p>\n

MARGIN OF ERROR<\/strong><\/p>\n

I have to say that any MoE (margin of error) greater than 5 points makes my hair itch, because the larger the margin of error, the less utility I impute to the poll. Even if it’s a highly rated pollster, such as Marist Poll<\/strong><\/em>, I still scratch mightily at my hair.<\/p>\n

There. Venting done.<\/p>\n

Oh, and The New York Times\/Siena College<\/strong><\/em> is giving a range for an MoE of \u00b13.9 points to \u00b14.3 points. Annoying.<\/p>\n

WHEN DO I DISCARD POLLS?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Generally, unknown pollsters stand a better chance of being cited than any pollster Silver Bulletin<\/strong><\/em><\/a> rates below a B- or B\/C. But there are no guarantees.<\/p>\n

WHAT’S WITH THESE REPEATED LINKS TO AN ECHELON INSIGHTS DOCUMENT?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Echelon Insights<\/strong><\/em> issued a single document that covers multiple polls. You’ll have to search in the document for State-specific results.<\/p>\n

But what’s also interesting, and makes me wonder if I should omit these results, is the wording of the questions, of which I’ll quote the Florida example:<\/p>\n

[QFLSenateBallot_Voted] Who did you vote for in the election for the U.S. Senate?
\n[RANDOMIZE 1-3]
\n[QFLSenBallotFull] If the 2026 election for the U.S. Senate were held today and you had to
\nmake a choice, for whom would you vote? [RANDOMIZE 1-3]
\n[QFLSenateBallotFullLeaner] And if you had to choose today, which of the following
\ncandidates would you vote for? [RANDOMIZE 1-3]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Is this just meant to be used before and<\/strong> after Election Day?<\/p>\n

Keep this in mind when reading Echelon Insights<\/strong><\/em> results. This may just be a matter of my ignorance, as I’m not a polling professional, of course.<\/p>\n

AROUND THE FAR CURVE<\/strong><\/p>\n

We can only hope, eh? Each hoofbeat banging the drum … oh, sorry<\/a>.<\/p>\n