Source: Politics<\/p>\n
A group of top Democratic Party pollsters <\/b>are set to release a public statement Tuesday acknowledging \u201cmajor errors\u201d in their 2020 polling \u2014 errors that left party officials stunned by election results that failed to come close to expectations in November.<\/p>\n
In an unusual move, five of the party\u2019s biggest polling firms have spent the past few months working together to explore what went wrong last year and how it can be fixed. It\u2019s part of an effort to understand why \u2014 despite data showing Joe Biden well ahead of former President Donald Trump, and Democrats poised to increase their House majority \u2014 the party won the presidency, the Senate and House by extremely narrow <\/b>margins.<\/p>\n
\u201cTwenty-twenty was an \u2018Oh, s—‘ moment for all of us,\u201d said one pollster involved in the effort, who was granted anonymity to discuss the process candidly. \u201cAnd I think that we all kinda quickly came to the point that we need to set our egos aside. We need to get this right.”<\/p>\n
That\u2019s about where the answers end. The collaboration\u2019s first public statement<\/a> acknowledges that their industry \u201csaw major errors and failed to live up to our own expectations.\u201d But the memo also underscores the limits of the polling autopsy, noting that \u201cno consensus on a solution has emerged.\u201d<\/p>\n According to Democrats involved with the internal review, Tuesday\u2019s statement marks the beginning of a years-long process to examine why, since 2012, most major elections have tilted against the party, despite favorable polling data before the vote. Up and down the ballot, Democrats have been, more often than not, shell-shocked by defeats in races they thought to be competitive, or narrower-than-expected, victories in contests they thought they led comfortably.<\/p>\n Democrats are not alone in reviewing what went wrong last year. The polling industry is engaged in multiple reviews of its 2020 performance, including a forthcoming report from the American Association for Public Opinion Research\u2019s task force<\/a> that is expected to address the overestimation of Democrats\u2019 performance, from the presidential race down to races for Congress and state offices.<\/p>\n The previously undisclosed <\/b>Democratic polling review is not being replicated by Republicans, who ultimately lost the presidency and the Senate, and won fewer House seats than Democrats. While some in the GOP were also surprised by the party\u2019s competitiveness last November and are studying their methods, there is no similar, organized effort moving into the 2022 midterms and the 2024 presidential election.<\/p>\n There\u2019s no simple answer for why the polls have missed the mark in recent elections. But one likely culprit for some of the errors is the deteriorating public trust in institutions, like government and the news media \u2014 and the correlation between that wariness and voting for Trump. Between his public statements and Twitter account, the former president cast doubt on polling specifically, which the Democratic consultants suggested led to his supporters refusing to participate in surveys.<\/p>\n \u201cTrump went after the polls,\u201d said another Democratic pollster involved in the partnership. \u201cHe was really pretty overt to those that were listening about some of his distrust of polls or media.\u201d<\/p>\n The 2020 election shattered turnout records \u2014 and since November, pollsters have been eagerly awaiting official <\/b>information from the states about who voted, and who didn\u2019t. That data is now almost entirely available, and there are clues hidden within.<\/p>\n The Democratic pollsters, who typically compete against each other for business, acknowledge that Trump was able to activate large numbers of voters who had turned out less reliably in the past. Looking at one state where the polls were off \u2014 Iowa, where Trump beat Biden handily and what had been seen as a toss-up Senate race went decisively for incumbent GOP Sen. Joni Ernst \u2014 Republicans classified as \u201clow-propensity voters\u201d turned out at four times the rate of Democrats in that category, according to the Democratic <\/b>memo.<\/p>\n \u201cThis turnout error was clearly one factor in polling being off across the board, but especially in deeply Republican areas,\u201d the memo reads. \u201cIt also meant, at least in some places, we again underestimated relative turnout among rural and white non-college voters, who are overrepresented among low propensity Republicans.\u201d<\/p>\n But sky-high turnout for Trump among irregular voters only explains a small slice of the problem, the pollsters concluded. Even if the polls conducted last year were properly adjusted for future turnout, they still would have been biased toward Democrats.<\/p>\n The memo floats at least three possible causes: late movement toward Trump and Republican candidates that polls conducted in the run-up to the election failed to catch, the Covid pandemic causing people who stayed home to answer the phone at a greater rate than those who did not follow restrictions, and the decline of social trust and faith in institutions.<\/p>\n But there\u2019s little clarity about how significant each of those hypotheses was.<\/p>\n \u201cWhile there is evidence some of these theories played a part, no consensus on a solution has emerged. What we have settled on is the idea there is something systematically different about the people we reached, and the people we did not<\/i>,\u201d the memo reads. <\/i>\u201cThis problem appears to have been amplified when Trump was on the ballot, and it is these particular voters who Trump activated that did not participate in polls.\u201d<\/p>\n Some Democrats believe these errors are a direct Trump effect \u2014 that he is a singular force in politics, engendering extreme opinions on both sides \u2014 and it will fade if he\u2019s no longer a candidate.<\/p>\n \u201cI don\u2019t think we know what it is. I think we still have a lot of work to do to figure it out,\u201d one pollster said. \u201cI\u2019m marginally optimistic that if Trump is on the ballot in \u201924 that we can fix it. I don\u2019t know. If he\u2019s not, I do think a lot of it could resolve itself.\u201d<\/p>\n The Democratic effort stands in contrast to the last major review of a party\u2019s polling practices. Following the 2012 election, the Republican National Committee\u2019s so-called \u201cautopsy\u201d \u2014 best known for its recommendation that party leaders moderate their views on immigration and other social issues \u2014 included a list of best practices for pollsters<\/a>, who were also summoned to party headquarters for discussions.<\/p>\n The five Democratic firms that signed onto the memo are ALG Research, Garin-Hart-Yang Research Group, GBAO Strategies, Global Strategy Group and Normington Petts. Together, they are five of the top six polling firms working for the Democratic Party apparatus, along with Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research, according to financial disclosure reports. ALG Research was Biden’s lead pollster in last year’s election.<\/p>\n Participants in Democrats\u2019 review said the process \u2014 which, unlike the GOP\u2019s 2012 effort, was not dictated from party officials \u2014 was collegial, despite the fact that the five firms compete against each other for business.<\/p>\n \u201cOne should feel comfortable talking to your competitors because, ultimately, we all want the same thing,\u201d said a third participant. \u201cWe all want a useful way to help give guidance to Democratic candidates and progressive causes.\u201d<\/p>\n