Brutal Article Rips Apart Karen Bass, Saying She Put on a Clinic on...
We Might Know the Source of the Los Angeles County Fires But the...
It Might Be Time to Resurrect This House Committee...But the Left Will Totally...
National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan Did Not Just Say This As Biden Leaves...
Look What Vehicle Is Going to Be in Trump's Inauguration Parade
Liberals Sure Feel Guilty About Things They’ve Done…But Always Cash the Checks
Kentucky Lawmakers Heading Wrong Direction on Gun Proposal
Pennsylvania Farm Leaders Applaud Aggressive Action Against Avian Flu
Many to Blame for LA's Ring of Fire
Will 47 Revive the U.S. Mining Industry?
Meta’s Free Speech U-Turn
Elon Musk Is Correct : End the Fed and the CFPB
Democrats Plan to Scrap Abortion Messaging After 2024 Fail
Jen Rubin Leaves WaPo to Blast Trump for Next 4 Years—And Guess Who’s...
Iran Offers Aid to California Amid Wildfires—Why the U.S. Should Be Cautious
Tipsheet

Revealed: British Pollster Who Nailed the US Election Explains How Her Team Did It

AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson

The final RealClearPolitics national head-to-head average in the 2024 election gave Democrat Kamala Harris a razor thin lead over Republican Donald Trump -- one-tenth of one percentage point.  The polling aggregator had Trump barely ahead, by the same microscopic margin, in their multi-candidate field average.  Trump went on to become the first GOP nominee to win the popular vote in two decades, with an advantage of millions of votes, adding up to a margin of just over one-and-a-half percentage points. RCP's state-level averages predicted Trump would win enough battlegrounds to win 287 Electoral College votes, enough to secure the presidency, but showed Harris in Michigan and Wisconsin (it should be noted that various other aggregators were less bullish on Trump's chances, across all of these metrics).  Trump swept all of the swing states, of course, hitting 312 electoral votes.  

Advertisement

One outfit that was not surprised by any of these developments was JL Partners, a British-American polling firm. Scarlett Maguire is a director at JL Partners, whom I have the pleasure of meeting in London recently.  She penned an op/ed in the Times just after our election, noting how accurate her firm's data turned out to be and juxtaposing their strong results with the now-infamous Ann Selzer disaster:

The Selzer poll was not weighted to party registration and its old-fashioned methodology favoured older liberal women who were notoriously more prepared to give pollsters their time on the phone. At my firm, JL Partners, we did not let the poll change our view. As a result we emerged with one of the most accurate projections for the electoral college...and were one of very few polling organisations that predicted Trump winning the popular vote...There will be many post-mortems into what went wrong for the Harris campaign, but a significant part of the blame must fall on those who chose to run a campaign that placed such strong emphasis on reproductive rights, despite it being nowhere near the most pressing issue for voters — women very much included.

Maguire joined me on my radio show this week to explain how her organization managed to more-or-less nail the final result, with insights into their methodology, and how they also conducted focus groups in swing states to both listen to real voters, but also to compare what voters were actually saying (qualitative) with what their numbers were showing (quantitative).  This is a fascinating and worthwhile conversation, especially for political data nerds.  Other, less successful pollsters might be well-advised to listen to what she has to say.  Anyone with even a passing interest in British politics should listen to the end, for a short debrief on the new Labour government's woes and early-onset unpopularity:
Advertisement

On the broader subject of polling, I'll leave you with this:

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement