Suit yourself, but I don’t have time for complete and total bullshit. I have a couple hours to give to politics every week… I would rather spend it writing some postcards or building some fellowship with some other people who are trying to help save democracy, then waste it Ruminating on lies. Besides, I always know what the right wing is saying about us, because they bully the mainstream media and into talking about it too. As for the polls, I’ve never heard Simon say anything other than that it’s a close competitive race… Precisely because we’re within the margin of error. But that doesn’t mean that there isn’t an actual trend happening… Just because we haven’t broken out of the margin yet doesn’t mean it’s irrelevant that across the board we’ve seen Biden pick up anywhere from 2 to 6 points net gain.
Alan, let me say this kindly to you - fuck off. You should just go. I present 14 polls showing us ahead, trend line moving in our direction, and yes, I think, given what happened in 2022 with deep corruption of the entire polling process by Republicans, we should not give Republican-aligned orgs the benefit of the doubt any longer. I have said, in every post, every day, in every presentation that we have to work to do. There are state polls in many of these states showing us in better shape. You can choose to believe a Rupert Murdoch publication over the polls of 14 other organizations over the last 5 weeks. Your call but the sentiment in which this was conveyed is not acceptable, particularly when I address the issue in the post itself. I am happy to refund your money if you choose to go.
Alan, I am a devoted daily reader of this newsletter. What I found troublesome about your comment is that Simon had so clearly addressed his position and thoughts about the WSJ poll in his remarks today. You might disagree with his position but your comment came off as if you hadn’t even read the post - and then by saying “ snorting hopium” read as mean as well. Maybe this wasn’t your intention but I think everyone is trying really hard in this community, especially Simon, and we need to be extra thoughtful in our interactions.
I will engage here, but the "snort Hopium" comment is way out of bounds, and there is no remorse here expressed above. We just don't fire off angry, frustrated messages here. I spend hours every day taking enormous care to present data to you that I see. You owe me the same respect, which has not been demonstrated here, and I am seriously pissed off.
1) I explained all this in my post yesterday, which you appear to not have read, a post I linked to today as well. There has started to be a separation between the public, independent polls which show the election close or even leaning Biden, and what Republican polls are finding which consistently show Trump up 2-5 points. This is exactly what happened in 2022, and the reason I got the election right when so few others did is that I discounted the many, well funded GOP aligned polls from the independent polls which were seeing a completely different election. The WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdoch. In my mind it's polls fall into the category of GOP aligned polls which I discount - not dismiss - but discount.
2) The race is clearly moving in our direction which will take some time to wind its way through the many polls being done. There is a lag - this is also something I have addressed.
3) No state polls are not more important than national polls. I see this constantly stated and it is baffling to me. We should trust a single set of low sample state polls by the most prominent right wing partisan in the country over 14 other national polls all showing Biden leading? We have very little polling in the states. We have lots of polling nationally. I prefer to go where we have more and complete data. A reminder that the final RCP map in 2022 had Rs getting to 54 seats in the Senate. The averages were incredibly wrong. I am not asking you to say oh, that's biased but there is all this other data showing a far better landscape for us and you choose to dismiss that? I try to look all this data and present to you what is most salient. I just don't put a lot of stock in Republican aligned polling any more, and choose to emphasize the enormous amount of other data available to us. I have explained this many times, in writing, in my presentations.
Before firing off obnoxious public messages to me do your homework, or find some where else to hang out.
How about apologizing for being an obnoxious ass and insulting everyone in this community? No this dialogue isn't good. You could have asked the question in a respectful and polite fashion but instead sent an impulsive and self-indulgent message. This is literally everything we are working against here, the core of Trumpism. Insulting, impulsive, ill-informed political engagement. I already addressed many of your concerns in posts IN THE LAST TWO DAYS that you apparently had not read. I've just lost 30-40 minutes of work time I can't get back. Your response here is deeply inadequate. You insulted me Alan. It's way out of bounds.
Moreover, all of The Wall Street Journal’s "history of being legit" entirely precedes their sell-out to Rupert Murdoch.
It is well-nigh impossible to point to a media owner who has done more damage to democracy in country after country: Australia, the UK, the USA...
Rupert Murdoch and his heir, Lachlan Murdoch, are highly effective right-wing propagandists. They have never aspired to nurturing professional, objective news coverage. That’s neither their vision nor mission.
Alan - to me the issue is that in saying “are we just supposed to snort more Hopium” you are essentially saying we should be worried and fearful rather than hopeful and positive. It’s a strange response to the overall good news that there are many polls moving in our direction to say “but this one poll doesn’t meet that test.” I don’t know the particulars of the WSJ but it’s apples and oranges (one poll versus many). I personally think it is incredibly important - given how many of our fellow Dems are paralyzed by concern trolling - to have this place be about winning (rather than fear of losing).
Simon: I am doing as much as I can to defeat MAGA. What gives you conviction that handwritten letters are still one of the most effective volunteering mechanisms to boost Democratic turnout?
In the last 2 election cycles, I have prioritized Vote Forward as my primary Democratic volunteering. Vote Forward (https://votefwd.org/) is a GOTV organization that aims to boost voter turnout with handwritten letters, especially among marginalized communities.
Per Nate Silver's multiple posts that boosting turnout is a "losing approach for 2024," the Financial Times' Racial Realignment theory, and Adam Carlson's aggregated cross-tabs, Democrats may very well fare better in 2024 if marginalized voters stay home in some swing states.
Just chiming in here. From what I've read - and I'm no statistician - boosting turnout isn't losing strategy, as long as it's not our ONLY strategy. For me it sure isn't and shouldn't be. There are alternative outfits to write for/with. Like you I have written letters with vote forward, but may I suggest looking at Activate America? Unlike Vote Forward Activate America is explicitly concentrated on persuading people to vote Democratic - and each of their campaigns are dedicated to an individual candidate ( Gallego, Brown etc.). Their letter/postcard scripts unequivocally state who the recipient should vote for, and provide a pretty good template which makes the case. Here's a link....https://www.activateamerica.vote. P.S. I have found Nate Silver increasingly hard to listen to in the last few years. I'm starting to suspect there was a reason he was let go from 538.
Honestly I don't, but I'm liking their approach better, at least when I read their scripts. I discovered them through other comment threads on this wonderful newsletter. Their raps/scripts feel "from the heart" and are easy to riff on ( of course as long you stay on message obviously lol).
By the way I should also add that Activate America does post carding. So should you chose to go this route here's a good place to purchase election themed postcards...https://createprotest.com. First used both Activate America and this to postcard for Tom Souzzi
I work extensively with Activate America on postcarding with my org, Indivisible Marin, and their work is evidence based. They target only low frequency voters in toss up races with research based messaging. I highly recommend them!
I want to add my "plug" for markersfordemocracy.org which is my grassroots home base. It started with two women writing post cards in 2017. There are now over 2000 members, a variety of zoom meetings almost daily, their own postcarding system, and wonderful guests, such as Simon (!). And there's no pressure to do any more than I can. I wrote 10 "get out the vote" postcards for Marilyn Lands - that's 10 more people who got a message about her. I love the feeling of being part of a community that is so connected to the grassroots energy this year!
Um, no. I don't have time to get to this today but please do not base anything you do on anything Nate Silver writes, particularly the ridiculous Starr Country post.
VoteRiders is non-partisan but they do partner with many Blue-leaning orgs targeting those most disproportionately impacted by voter ID laws.
“Over the course of two years, we directly reached over 7 million voters with ID information and help.
But did it make an impact? I’m excited to share the results from our most rigorous program analysis to date and — spoiler alert — yes, VoteRiders’ work made a real difference.”
Per Nate Silver [claims] that boosting turnout is a "losing approach for 2024".
That is one of the most insane and illogical statements I have ever heard from a political pundit, let alone a self-described wonky one. It makes zero sense.
It couldn’t be simpler: If far more people on our team vote, in race after race, swing state after swing state, our team wins!
.
NB. If 75% or Democrats and non-MAGA Independents vote, how can we possibly lose?!
Reminder to everyone here that Nate Silver has a degree in economics (not statistics or poli sci), who has never worked in politics for a day, whose start in political analysis came as an anonymous blogger, whose actual interest was in sports analysis, and whose current occupation is poker. He is a minor celebrity who got outsized media attention over a decade ago by dint of getting very lucky a couple times while looking the spitting image of the "numbers guy" stereotype people see in their heads.
I may or may not like what James Carville or David Axelrod or any other perennial pundit has to say, but I am going to take them as seriously as Simon because they have comparable experience in this field. Silver, not so much.
Under most rules of evidence "experts" are subject to "voir dire" on their qualifications. Once qualified, subjected to cross examination and the other party has an opportunity to present opposing expert testimony. If they aren't really an expert based on qualifications (voir dire) they don't get to testify further.
IMHO the NYT and most MSM just wants a horserace to sell papers.
Trump advocates like Fox et al should be reminding their readers that Trump stole from kids with cancer and hates dogs.
If I were conspiracy minded, I would say that Nate Silver got his nose out of joint because grassroots GOTV efforts messed with his 2022 "red wave" theory/model and then he got major egg on his face when he doubled down and ridiculed Simon and Tom Bonier who predicted the opposite.
Hi Ariel, Some friends of mine and I have organized a grassroots postcard project in AZCD06. Key to this kind of project designed to boost turnout with handwritten notes is the voter targeting. Using micro targeting data, our project is targeting voters who support reproductive rights but score in the mid range for turnout. Our project will drop approx 40,000 postcards with handwritten notes just before mail-in ballots arrive on Sept 30. Mail in votes comprise about 85% the vote. I suspect Vote Forward and other similar efforts are not trying to boost turnout for ALL voters….just voters who are likely to vote for Democrats. We shared our strategy as we recruited volunteers.
Unlike Jarrod, I actually am a statistician ;-). The big challenge with determining whether GOTV works is that most of the time you have no way of determining whether the voter would have voted anyway. The best way around this is to run a randomized controlled trial (RCT) where there is a hold-back "control" group that doesn't receive the "intervention" (e.g., postcard or letter).
I firmly believe that in-person two-way dialogues (like deep canvassing where you build a relationship) gives you the best GOTV results. But most communities do not have the volunteer power to do this on a large scale basis. It requires that you visit the same homes multiple times at times when the homeowners are home and willing to talk to you.
I'm in Charlotte, NC and we are doing this in one state house district, but that is basically a grudge match because a Democratic state rep flipped from (D) to (R) in this session and gave the GOP a veto-proof majority (which allowed them to pass an abortion ban). The GOP redrew her district which was D+15 (I think) to R+2. Come hell or high water we are determined to flip the district Blue and kick her to the curb. But we certainly can't replicate this all over.
Phone-banking is your other opportunity to have two way conversations, but very few people will answer the phone and most phone banks are limited to 7 - 9 pm weeknights and Saturday and Sunday afternoons. And many people HATE doing it. I'm one of them, although I will volunteer if I am allowed to leave a message. But that defeats the idea of a 2-way conversation.
That leaves text-banking and postcards or letters.
I do both letters and postcards and rely on the organizations to find the best "low propensity" candidates to target. Vote Forward does this for sure as do many postcard campaigns based on their actual voter records. This might include people who don't vote in primaries, midterms or local elections (in places with off-year elections). It is tougher in presidential-year elections when more people vote anyway.
IMO, there are several advantages to writing letters or postcards:
* You have total control of when you do it and you don't need a big block of time all at once.
* You can bank letters and/or postcards and mail them out in bulk as specified by the campaign
* there are no geographical constraints that you be in the state or district that you are supporting.
Some people need multiple touch points to be convinced to vote. By leveraging volunteers outside the swing state or district precious, local volunteer time can be reserved for the high impact in-person ground game. We saw this at work in a number of special elections over the last several years. And as far as I know, there is NO GOP equivalent for these postcards and letters. I also think the GOP relies on robo calls rather than volunteer phone banks.
I don't understand how Democratic Senate candidates are doing well in swing states but we're supposed to believe Biden is down by 5-8 points in those same states.
You dont understand because it is not understandable, and it is not understandable because it is almost certainly not happening. This is one of those cases where either everything we know about political science, modern American history, and general common sense is suddenly worthless, or... one of these sets of polls has to be wrong. (Spoiler: it's door #2.)
It’s Gaza. Not just the youths. I am a 62 year old liberal in Pennsylvania who has thought up to now that Biden has been the best president in my lifetime. However, I have begun to believe that the Israeli government is trying to starve the Palestinians in Gaza to death. We should not provide aid to Israel until 500 aid trucks are getting through everyday and the IDF are distributing the aid. This is a moral question. Bibi is a Trump ally. Biden’s support for Bibi’s government makes him look weak and stupid. My friends and family in Pennsylvania all agree on this issue. Biden has to change course now.
Simon--Could you make some kind of chart of which polling outfits you think are best? You refer to Republican polls that throw off the average, but I don't know which ones you mean specifically. Thanks.
Yet, CNN and MSNBC are covering the WSJ poll and bothsiding as trump is losing support with Rs, and there’s a good percentage of uncommitted voters who voted that way in the primary, so Biden is in trouble too. I wish they would have you on their morning shows so you can set them straight. They just can’t help themselves to covering a made up horse race and creating false drama.
Leave it to our infotainment outlets. Thankfully Simon has and I think will appear on more of them! I can just see Mika Brzezinski's pout as I type this. What a joke.
As soon as Mika said they'd discuss some swing state polls after the break, I turned it off. Even though I hadn't seen the referenced polls, I knew much hand-wringing was ahead. I just can't do it right now.
It's one thing to cover polls as if they are gospel, but it is another to *selectively pick* polls to cover that only reaffirm the narrative you are determined to provide. MSNBC feeds liberals the drug of anxiety just like Fox feeds conservatives the drug of fear. (Yeah yeah yeah, I know they're not the same, but are you gonna tell me I'm wrong?)
Wall St Journal IS still a reputable outlet (beyond the editorials), but it isn't more reputable a pollster than Bloomberg or PBS or Quinnipiac etc. Unless the program is covering ALL of them while providing appropriate context, that is pure journalistic malpractice.
I have banned Alan from commenting for a month. The repeated negative sentiment, self-indulgence and spreading of false information on here was too much. To repeat - the primary pollster of the new WSJ is Trump's pollster. These results are very out of whack with lots and lots of other data so keep calm all, and carry on.
I was shocked and dismayed when the Wall Street Journal sold out to Rupert Murdoch. It’s hard to think of a way to more thoroughly, and immediately, destroy a publishing legacy.
I’ve been a free subscriber for a couple weeks now, but the way you handled this commenter today inspired me to upgrade to paid. Thank you for the insights you provide. I’m grateful I found you.
L.J. I think as long as we stay on top of the "threats" or fires so to speak we can collectively keep them contained. It's obvious from the amount we all discuss him and others here - and even statements I've heard from influential individuals we have appropriate awareness of RFK, Jill Stein and other third party clowns than in previous election cycles. We just need to keep reminding our networks of these spoilers. As long as we all stay vigilant & focused, then we should have no problem reminding everyone exactly who these people. The more awareness the better!
Sorry a PS on my comment ( can't edit on my phone) - but RFK's disqualifiers are all there on paper ( including that running mate as ArcticStones pointed out). We just gotta make sure we communicate them effectively!
I also quite liked the photo that was released on St.Patrick’s day, showing President Biden with dozens of prominent members of the Kennedy family. This is masterful trolling!
It’s so telling that not a single member of the Kennedy family is supporting RFK Jr’s presidential campaign, which is financed by the same right-wing money that’s behind Trump.
Simon has repeatedly given his feelings that he is not concerned about this topic at this point.
He may be right, he may be wrong, and you can use your own mind to come to your own opinion. No offense, but asking someone to restate something they have already covered just makes it seem like you weren't listening the first several times.
LJ, this substack has been growing by leaps and bounds and it seems like every new person either asks to be reassured about about polling data or third party candidates.
There is is search feature within Hopium (to the right of the title) and had you typed in "RFK Jr." into the search you would have been presented with 2 posts by Simon on this topic within the last 10 days:
Cheryl, thank you for pointing out that Hopium Search feature, of which I was not aware! Perhaps in a future Substack tweak that feature could be made for more obvious and intuitive?
Yes, the member's comment was hurtful coming in this community which is thoughtful and forward looking. I understand the anxiety because Dem Presidential candidates have won popular vote but lost electoral college. I also know the Biden Harris campaign has multiple scenarios to 270 and will fortify our blue wall from New England to Minnesota save sadly Ohio but you never know. I worked in campaigns for a few years in a y ounger era and know that if you get over 50 percent and expand it you are doing very well.
I had lunch with a friend of mine who is lukewarm about Biden/Harris. She was a Bernie supporter. I was saddened to learn this because the more I hear directly from President Biden, the more I like him. I had one friend tell me she thought Harris was stupid and others tell me she is not authentic. I don't understand this, but it's out there. What gives and how do we combat this? I wonder whether anyone else has had similar experiences. Thanks.
I really do not get the Harris reception. However, as long as they're busting their asses on the campaign trail - and we know they are - and we bust ours, we can do this. Not only do the polls, cross tabs, media outlets and tweets by snarky statisticians NOT VOTE, but they DO NOT campaign either !!! Keep calm and message on!
I've wondered the same thing about the perception out there about Harris. I thought having her give the speech at Planned Parenthood a couple of weeks ago gave her some good visibility. I hope she does more of this!
Useful shortcut: "inauthentic" = accomplished woman. I'm a guy, and even I can see this clear as day. When have you ever heard that word used for a man? (We would refer to this kind of man as a "power player.") It's the socially acceptable way of saying "I bet she's a phony b----," and it is predicated on the assumption that the woman in question just doesn't belong in the room she is in, that if everything was as it should be she would never have made it in here on her merits, it's just not "natural," so there must be some scheming afoot. If the woman in question isn't *outwardly* ruthless, but instead has a reputation for actually being somewhat nice to work with, that goes tenfold.
Hillary was "inauthentic." So were Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar when they were running. Heck, so are most female CEOs or celebrities who refuse to be apologetic about their own acumen, from Madonna to TSwift on down.
"Stupid," on the other hand, is the catch-all term among Americans for any politician whose ideas we find maddening, with any strategic blunder or unfortunate statement used as a gathering body of evidence. "Anyone would have to be stupid to believe what he is saying. How on Earth did that stupid idiot make his way through Yale?" Well, by not being stupid!
There really is no way to combat this other than really leaning into someone to elaborate more specifically on why they have that perception, and then confidently claiming your view to the contrary when they inevitably have no real response.
"Hillary was "inauthentic." So were Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar when they were running. Heck, so are most female CEOs or celebrities who refuse to be apologetic about their own acumen, from Madonna to TSwift on down."
I agree 💯percent. I think "inauthentic" coming from a woman can be "I can't relate to her" especially if it comes from someone who is more comfortable in a traditional gender role - either because of their age, career (or lack there of) or their religious background. It could also be due to mis- or dis-information if they spend a lot of time on social media.
I wonder if this person thinks Mike Pence was "authentic"? Or Donald Trump for that matter!
Well, every televangelist I’ve ever heard is inauthentic. Kavanaugh’s defense and denial during his confirmation hearings were inauthentic. Comer’s claims about anything are inauthentic. The rationale behind many recent Supreme Court decisions is absolutely inauthentic. Trump’s bone spur diagnosis, his claimed height and weight, his golf scores and his tan are inauthentic…
I have complete faith that Biden will not let the Israel-Gaza war turn into his own personal Viet Nam. Is my faith misguided or do you,too, feel confident that Biden will have the US stop sending bombs or find a way for a cease fire?
Wonderful to see all the good news that’s piling up – snowballing, really!
Simon, I deeply respect your data-driven selection of which races you direct our Hopium efforts to. To attain results, we have to concentrate our efforts. Do I understand your comment below to mean that the fight to reelect Senators Sherrod Brown (Ohio) and Jon Tester (Montana) will primarily be left to others? Hopium is, after all, one of many organizations fighting the good battle in 2024!
"Some have asked about our strategy for the cycle – we will only be helping non-incumbents"
I take it to mean that this is a relatively small operation run by an individual, so we as a group can only choose a couple projects or run the risk of spreading our energies too thin. This is Simon's site, and these are the projects he wants to focus on. That doesn't mean other races aren't worthwhile or necessary. Obviously any one of us as an individual can do more in different campaigns if we so choose.
Thanks, Jerrod. I watched Biden's comments at the Correspondent's dinner and he was so funny I would have voted for him simply for his sense of humor alone. Fascists aren't funny and let's keep working hard to keep them out.
So do I. Honestly though I can't help but feel people are much more engaged than they were back then. The way I see it it's our job to accelerate that trend! Plus we have much better tools at our disposal to do so than we did then. Like the Dos Equis slogan "Stay thirsty my friends" I say " Stay vigilant my friends"
Suit yourself, but I don’t have time for complete and total bullshit. I have a couple hours to give to politics every week… I would rather spend it writing some postcards or building some fellowship with some other people who are trying to help save democracy, then waste it Ruminating on lies. Besides, I always know what the right wing is saying about us, because they bully the mainstream media and into talking about it too. As for the polls, I’ve never heard Simon say anything other than that it’s a close competitive race… Precisely because we’re within the margin of error. But that doesn’t mean that there isn’t an actual trend happening… Just because we haven’t broken out of the margin yet doesn’t mean it’s irrelevant that across the board we’ve seen Biden pick up anywhere from 2 to 6 points net gain.
Alan, let me say this kindly to you - fuck off. You should just go. I present 14 polls showing us ahead, trend line moving in our direction, and yes, I think, given what happened in 2022 with deep corruption of the entire polling process by Republicans, we should not give Republican-aligned orgs the benefit of the doubt any longer. I have said, in every post, every day, in every presentation that we have to work to do. There are state polls in many of these states showing us in better shape. You can choose to believe a Rupert Murdoch publication over the polls of 14 other organizations over the last 5 weeks. Your call but the sentiment in which this was conveyed is not acceptable, particularly when I address the issue in the post itself. I am happy to refund your money if you choose to go.
Alan, I am a devoted daily reader of this newsletter. What I found troublesome about your comment is that Simon had so clearly addressed his position and thoughts about the WSJ poll in his remarks today. You might disagree with his position but your comment came off as if you hadn’t even read the post - and then by saying “ snorting hopium” read as mean as well. Maybe this wasn’t your intention but I think everyone is trying really hard in this community, especially Simon, and we need to be extra thoughtful in our interactions.
I appreciate your acknowledgement. Glad to have you on the same side and reading daily. I know it really helps me!
I will engage here, but the "snort Hopium" comment is way out of bounds, and there is no remorse here expressed above. We just don't fire off angry, frustrated messages here. I spend hours every day taking enormous care to present data to you that I see. You owe me the same respect, which has not been demonstrated here, and I am seriously pissed off.
1) I explained all this in my post yesterday, which you appear to not have read, a post I linked to today as well. There has started to be a separation between the public, independent polls which show the election close or even leaning Biden, and what Republican polls are finding which consistently show Trump up 2-5 points. This is exactly what happened in 2022, and the reason I got the election right when so few others did is that I discounted the many, well funded GOP aligned polls from the independent polls which were seeing a completely different election. The WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdoch. In my mind it's polls fall into the category of GOP aligned polls which I discount - not dismiss - but discount.
2) The race is clearly moving in our direction which will take some time to wind its way through the many polls being done. There is a lag - this is also something I have addressed.
3) No state polls are not more important than national polls. I see this constantly stated and it is baffling to me. We should trust a single set of low sample state polls by the most prominent right wing partisan in the country over 14 other national polls all showing Biden leading? We have very little polling in the states. We have lots of polling nationally. I prefer to go where we have more and complete data. A reminder that the final RCP map in 2022 had Rs getting to 54 seats in the Senate. The averages were incredibly wrong. I am not asking you to say oh, that's biased but there is all this other data showing a far better landscape for us and you choose to dismiss that? I try to look all this data and present to you what is most salient. I just don't put a lot of stock in Republican aligned polling any more, and choose to emphasize the enormous amount of other data available to us. I have explained this many times, in writing, in my presentations.
Before firing off obnoxious public messages to me do your homework, or find some where else to hang out.
How about apologizing for being an obnoxious ass and insulting everyone in this community? No this dialogue isn't good. You could have asked the question in a respectful and polite fashion but instead sent an impulsive and self-indulgent message. This is literally everything we are working against here, the core of Trumpism. Insulting, impulsive, ill-informed political engagement. I already addressed many of your concerns in posts IN THE LAST TWO DAYS that you apparently had not read. I've just lost 30-40 minutes of work time I can't get back. Your response here is deeply inadequate. You insulted me Alan. It's way out of bounds.
What a perfect response. I wish I was able to write a fraction as well as you do.
Did you read Simon's comment about the WSJ poll?
where is this "WSJ have long history of being legit" argument coming from? The primary pollster in this poll is Trump's pollster.
Moreover, all of The Wall Street Journal’s "history of being legit" entirely precedes their sell-out to Rupert Murdoch.
It is well-nigh impossible to point to a media owner who has done more damage to democracy in country after country: Australia, the UK, the USA...
Rupert Murdoch and his heir, Lachlan Murdoch, are highly effective right-wing propagandists. They have never aspired to nurturing professional, objective news coverage. That’s neither their vision nor mission.
Alan - to me the issue is that in saying “are we just supposed to snort more Hopium” you are essentially saying we should be worried and fearful rather than hopeful and positive. It’s a strange response to the overall good news that there are many polls moving in our direction to say “but this one poll doesn’t meet that test.” I don’t know the particulars of the WSJ but it’s apples and oranges (one poll versus many). I personally think it is incredibly important - given how many of our fellow Dems are paralyzed by concern trolling - to have this place be about winning (rather than fear of losing).
Simon: I am doing as much as I can to defeat MAGA. What gives you conviction that handwritten letters are still one of the most effective volunteering mechanisms to boost Democratic turnout?
In the last 2 election cycles, I have prioritized Vote Forward as my primary Democratic volunteering. Vote Forward (https://votefwd.org/) is a GOTV organization that aims to boost voter turnout with handwritten letters, especially among marginalized communities.
Per Nate Silver's multiple posts that boosting turnout is a "losing approach for 2024," the Financial Times' Racial Realignment theory, and Adam Carlson's aggregated cross-tabs, Democrats may very well fare better in 2024 if marginalized voters stay home in some swing states.
I worry Vote Forward will be counterproductive and boost support for Donald Trump like Nate Silver described in Starr County, TX (https://www.natesilver.net/p/democrats-are-hemorrhaging-support).
Kindly,
Ariel
Just chiming in here. From what I've read - and I'm no statistician - boosting turnout isn't losing strategy, as long as it's not our ONLY strategy. For me it sure isn't and shouldn't be. There are alternative outfits to write for/with. Like you I have written letters with vote forward, but may I suggest looking at Activate America? Unlike Vote Forward Activate America is explicitly concentrated on persuading people to vote Democratic - and each of their campaigns are dedicated to an individual candidate ( Gallego, Brown etc.). Their letter/postcard scripts unequivocally state who the recipient should vote for, and provide a pretty good template which makes the case. Here's a link....https://www.activateamerica.vote. P.S. I have found Nate Silver increasingly hard to listen to in the last few years. I'm starting to suspect there was a reason he was let go from 538.
Thank you Jarrod! I will take a look at Activate America. Do you know if data or proofpoints shows that Activate America is effective?
Nate Silver’s recent years of commentary have at times also struck me as “a new Nate.”
Honestly I don't, but I'm liking their approach better, at least when I read their scripts. I discovered them through other comment threads on this wonderful newsletter. Their raps/scripts feel "from the heart" and are easy to riff on ( of course as long you stay on message obviously lol).
By the way I should also add that Activate America does post carding. So should you chose to go this route here's a good place to purchase election themed postcards...https://createprotest.com. First used both Activate America and this to postcard for Tom Souzzi
I work extensively with Activate America on postcarding with my org, Indivisible Marin, and their work is evidence based. They target only low frequency voters in toss up races with research based messaging. I highly recommend them!
Just ordered a new round of addresses !
Hi Laurie, I have attended some interesting presentations through Indivisibe Marin
Thank you for joining us!
I want to add my "plug" for markersfordemocracy.org which is my grassroots home base. It started with two women writing post cards in 2017. There are now over 2000 members, a variety of zoom meetings almost daily, their own postcarding system, and wonderful guests, such as Simon (!). And there's no pressure to do any more than I can. I wrote 10 "get out the vote" postcards for Marilyn Lands - that's 10 more people who got a message about her. I love the feeling of being part of a community that is so connected to the grassroots energy this year!
Um, no. I don't have time to get to this today but please do not base anything you do on anything Nate Silver writes, particularly the ridiculous Starr Country post.
Thanks so much for saying this, Simon. Nate has really gone off the rails in recent years.
Just chiming in also, Ariel. I’ve written for VoteForward although my favorite org to write letters
for is VoteRiders :https://www.voteriders.org/voteriders-impact/.
VoteRiders is non-partisan but they do partner with many Blue-leaning orgs targeting those most disproportionately impacted by voter ID laws.
“Over the course of two years, we directly reached over 7 million voters with ID information and help.
But did it make an impact? I’m excited to share the results from our most rigorous program analysis to date and — spoiler alert — yes, VoteRiders’ work made a real difference.”
Thank Kathy! I'll have to look at this too!
See my reply to Kathy
Will look at this as well ! I need to make a list !
I just finished up 60 VoteRiders letters to NC voters through BigTent USA
https://www.bigtentusa.org/take-action-2/
Per Nate Silver [claims] that boosting turnout is a "losing approach for 2024".
That is one of the most insane and illogical statements I have ever heard from a political pundit, let alone a self-described wonky one. It makes zero sense.
It couldn’t be simpler: If far more people on our team vote, in race after race, swing state after swing state, our team wins!
.
NB. If 75% or Democrats and non-MAGA Independents vote, how can we possibly lose?!
Reminder to everyone here that Nate Silver has a degree in economics (not statistics or poli sci), who has never worked in politics for a day, whose start in political analysis came as an anonymous blogger, whose actual interest was in sports analysis, and whose current occupation is poker. He is a minor celebrity who got outsized media attention over a decade ago by dint of getting very lucky a couple times while looking the spitting image of the "numbers guy" stereotype people see in their heads.
I may or may not like what James Carville or David Axelrod or any other perennial pundit has to say, but I am going to take them as seriously as Simon because they have comparable experience in this field. Silver, not so much.
Under most rules of evidence "experts" are subject to "voir dire" on their qualifications. Once qualified, subjected to cross examination and the other party has an opportunity to present opposing expert testimony. If they aren't really an expert based on qualifications (voir dire) they don't get to testify further.
IMHO the NYT and most MSM just wants a horserace to sell papers.
Trump advocates like Fox et al should be reminding their readers that Trump stole from kids with cancer and hates dogs.
If I were conspiracy minded, I would say that Nate Silver got his nose out of joint because grassroots GOTV efforts messed with his 2022 "red wave" theory/model and then he got major egg on his face when he doubled down and ridiculed Simon and Tom Bonier who predicted the opposite.
Hi Ariel, Some friends of mine and I have organized a grassroots postcard project in AZCD06. Key to this kind of project designed to boost turnout with handwritten notes is the voter targeting. Using micro targeting data, our project is targeting voters who support reproductive rights but score in the mid range for turnout. Our project will drop approx 40,000 postcards with handwritten notes just before mail-in ballots arrive on Sept 30. Mail in votes comprise about 85% the vote. I suspect Vote Forward and other similar efforts are not trying to boost turnout for ALL voters….just voters who are likely to vote for Democrats. We shared our strategy as we recruited volunteers.
Hi Ariel,
Unlike Jarrod, I actually am a statistician ;-). The big challenge with determining whether GOTV works is that most of the time you have no way of determining whether the voter would have voted anyway. The best way around this is to run a randomized controlled trial (RCT) where there is a hold-back "control" group that doesn't receive the "intervention" (e.g., postcard or letter).
Vote Forward does this and has written about it extensively here: https://votefwd.org/impact. Some postcard groups also do this but some do not. Here are a few write-ups from one group that does track their results: https://shop.bluewavepostcards.org/pages/why-postcards.
I firmly believe that in-person two-way dialogues (like deep canvassing where you build a relationship) gives you the best GOTV results. But most communities do not have the volunteer power to do this on a large scale basis. It requires that you visit the same homes multiple times at times when the homeowners are home and willing to talk to you.
I'm in Charlotte, NC and we are doing this in one state house district, but that is basically a grudge match because a Democratic state rep flipped from (D) to (R) in this session and gave the GOP a veto-proof majority (which allowed them to pass an abortion ban). The GOP redrew her district which was D+15 (I think) to R+2. Come hell or high water we are determined to flip the district Blue and kick her to the curb. But we certainly can't replicate this all over.
Phone-banking is your other opportunity to have two way conversations, but very few people will answer the phone and most phone banks are limited to 7 - 9 pm weeknights and Saturday and Sunday afternoons. And many people HATE doing it. I'm one of them, although I will volunteer if I am allowed to leave a message. But that defeats the idea of a 2-way conversation.
That leaves text-banking and postcards or letters.
I do both letters and postcards and rely on the organizations to find the best "low propensity" candidates to target. Vote Forward does this for sure as do many postcard campaigns based on their actual voter records. This might include people who don't vote in primaries, midterms or local elections (in places with off-year elections). It is tougher in presidential-year elections when more people vote anyway.
IMO, there are several advantages to writing letters or postcards:
* You have total control of when you do it and you don't need a big block of time all at once.
* You can bank letters and/or postcards and mail them out in bulk as specified by the campaign
* there are no geographical constraints that you be in the state or district that you are supporting.
Some people need multiple touch points to be convinced to vote. By leveraging volunteers outside the swing state or district precious, local volunteer time can be reserved for the high impact in-person ground game. We saw this at work in a number of special elections over the last several years. And as far as I know, there is NO GOP equivalent for these postcards and letters. I also think the GOP relies on robo calls rather than volunteer phone banks.
This is quite useful ! Thank you ! Always good to have insight into these operations actually are designed!
I don't understand how Democratic Senate candidates are doing well in swing states but we're supposed to believe Biden is down by 5-8 points in those same states.
It's not possible.
The Congressional generic is also clearly improving for us too, along with Biden's overall polling numbers.
You dont understand because it is not understandable, and it is not understandable because it is almost certainly not happening. This is one of those cases where either everything we know about political science, modern American history, and general common sense is suddenly worthless, or... one of these sets of polls has to be wrong. (Spoiler: it's door #2.)
It’s Gaza. Not just the youths. I am a 62 year old liberal in Pennsylvania who has thought up to now that Biden has been the best president in my lifetime. However, I have begun to believe that the Israeli government is trying to starve the Palestinians in Gaza to death. We should not provide aid to Israel until 500 aid trucks are getting through everyday and the IDF are distributing the aid. This is a moral question. Bibi is a Trump ally. Biden’s support for Bibi’s government makes him look weak and stupid. My friends and family in Pennsylvania all agree on this issue. Biden has to change course now.
Simon--Could you make some kind of chart of which polling outfits you think are best? You refer to Republican polls that throw off the average, but I don't know which ones you mean specifically. Thanks.
Yet, CNN and MSNBC are covering the WSJ poll and bothsiding as trump is losing support with Rs, and there’s a good percentage of uncommitted voters who voted that way in the primary, so Biden is in trouble too. I wish they would have you on their morning shows so you can set them straight. They just can’t help themselves to covering a made up horse race and creating false drama.
Leave it to our infotainment outlets. Thankfully Simon has and I think will appear on more of them! I can just see Mika Brzezinski's pout as I type this. What a joke.
As soon as Mika said they'd discuss some swing state polls after the break, I turned it off. Even though I hadn't seen the referenced polls, I knew much hand-wringing was ahead. I just can't do it right now.
I blocked their videos on my YouTube channel back in December. I simply don't have time for their theatrical hand-wringing.
It's one thing to cover polls as if they are gospel, but it is another to *selectively pick* polls to cover that only reaffirm the narrative you are determined to provide. MSNBC feeds liberals the drug of anxiety just like Fox feeds conservatives the drug of fear. (Yeah yeah yeah, I know they're not the same, but are you gonna tell me I'm wrong?)
Wall St Journal IS still a reputable outlet (beyond the editorials), but it isn't more reputable a pollster than Bloomberg or PBS or Quinnipiac etc. Unless the program is covering ALL of them while providing appropriate context, that is pure journalistic malpractice.
I have banned Alan from commenting for a month. The repeated negative sentiment, self-indulgence and spreading of false information on here was too much. To repeat - the primary pollster of the new WSJ is Trump's pollster. These results are very out of whack with lots and lots of other data so keep calm all, and carry on.
I was shocked and dismayed when the Wall Street Journal sold out to Rupert Murdoch. It’s hard to think of a way to more thoroughly, and immediately, destroy a publishing legacy.
I’ve been a free subscriber for a couple weeks now, but the way you handled this commenter today inspired me to upgrade to paid. Thank you for the insights you provide. I’m grateful I found you.
Hi Simon,
What are your thoughts about RFK, Jr.'s, campaign, and his threat level to keep Biden from being reelected?
This has me very concerned.
I hope you will add him in the mix of polls going forward.
Thank you and keep up the great work!
L.J., I have a question to you: What do YOU think about RFK Jr. choosing someone who is OPPOSED to IVF as his VP running mate?
You beat me to it ArcticStones !
L.J. I think as long as we stay on top of the "threats" or fires so to speak we can collectively keep them contained. It's obvious from the amount we all discuss him and others here - and even statements I've heard from influential individuals we have appropriate awareness of RFK, Jill Stein and other third party clowns than in previous election cycles. We just need to keep reminding our networks of these spoilers. As long as we all stay vigilant & focused, then we should have no problem reminding everyone exactly who these people. The more awareness the better!
Sorry a PS on my comment ( can't edit on my phone) - but RFK's disqualifiers are all there on paper ( including that running mate as ArcticStones pointed out). We just gotta make sure we communicate them effectively!
Thank you!
I also quite liked the photo that was released on St.Patrick’s day, showing President Biden with dozens of prominent members of the Kennedy family. This is masterful trolling!
It’s so telling that not a single member of the Kennedy family is supporting RFK Jr’s presidential campaign, which is financed by the same right-wing money that’s behind Trump.
Simon has repeatedly given his feelings that he is not concerned about this topic at this point.
He may be right, he may be wrong, and you can use your own mind to come to your own opinion. No offense, but asking someone to restate something they have already covered just makes it seem like you weren't listening the first several times.
Excuse me, Will from Cal, rude comments have no place here. I am new to this newsletter.
LJ, this substack has been growing by leaps and bounds and it seems like every new person either asks to be reassured about about polling data or third party candidates.
There is is search feature within Hopium (to the right of the title) and had you typed in "RFK Jr." into the search you would have been presented with 2 posts by Simon on this topic within the last 10 days:
https://www.hopiumchronicles.com/p/forward-or-backward-my-warning-from
https://www.hopiumchronicles.com/p/the-case-for-optimism-rejecting-trumps
Please try this next time to see if he has already addressed your question recently. I bet Simon will be grateful.
Thank you, Cheryl.
Cheryl, thank you for pointing out that Hopium Search feature, of which I was not aware! Perhaps in a future Substack tweak that feature could be made for more obvious and intuitive?
Yes, the member's comment was hurtful coming in this community which is thoughtful and forward looking. I understand the anxiety because Dem Presidential candidates have won popular vote but lost electoral college. I also know the Biden Harris campaign has multiple scenarios to 270 and will fortify our blue wall from New England to Minnesota save sadly Ohio but you never know. I worked in campaigns for a few years in a y ounger era and know that if you get over 50 percent and expand it you are doing very well.
The biggest other factor so far over the past few years is we kick their butts in state elections across the map.
I had lunch with a friend of mine who is lukewarm about Biden/Harris. She was a Bernie supporter. I was saddened to learn this because the more I hear directly from President Biden, the more I like him. I had one friend tell me she thought Harris was stupid and others tell me she is not authentic. I don't understand this, but it's out there. What gives and how do we combat this? I wonder whether anyone else has had similar experiences. Thanks.
I really do not get the Harris reception. However, as long as they're busting their asses on the campaign trail - and we know they are - and we bust ours, we can do this. Not only do the polls, cross tabs, media outlets and tweets by snarky statisticians NOT VOTE, but they DO NOT campaign either !!! Keep calm and message on!
A lot of those crappy polls (and crappy pundits) are way out in left field – or, should I say, extremely far out in right field.
I've wondered the same thing about the perception out there about Harris. I thought having her give the speech at Planned Parenthood a couple of weeks ago gave her some good visibility. I hope she does more of this!
Useful shortcut: "inauthentic" = accomplished woman. I'm a guy, and even I can see this clear as day. When have you ever heard that word used for a man? (We would refer to this kind of man as a "power player.") It's the socially acceptable way of saying "I bet she's a phony b----," and it is predicated on the assumption that the woman in question just doesn't belong in the room she is in, that if everything was as it should be she would never have made it in here on her merits, it's just not "natural," so there must be some scheming afoot. If the woman in question isn't *outwardly* ruthless, but instead has a reputation for actually being somewhat nice to work with, that goes tenfold.
Hillary was "inauthentic." So were Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar when they were running. Heck, so are most female CEOs or celebrities who refuse to be apologetic about their own acumen, from Madonna to TSwift on down.
"Stupid," on the other hand, is the catch-all term among Americans for any politician whose ideas we find maddening, with any strategic blunder or unfortunate statement used as a gathering body of evidence. "Anyone would have to be stupid to believe what he is saying. How on Earth did that stupid idiot make his way through Yale?" Well, by not being stupid!
There really is no way to combat this other than really leaning into someone to elaborate more specifically on why they have that perception, and then confidently claiming your view to the contrary when they inevitably have no real response.
"Hillary was "inauthentic." So were Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar when they were running. Heck, so are most female CEOs or celebrities who refuse to be apologetic about their own acumen, from Madonna to TSwift on down."
I agree 💯percent. I think "inauthentic" coming from a woman can be "I can't relate to her" especially if it comes from someone who is more comfortable in a traditional gender role - either because of their age, career (or lack there of) or their religious background. It could also be due to mis- or dis-information if they spend a lot of time on social media.
I wonder if this person thinks Mike Pence was "authentic"? Or Donald Trump for that matter!
Well, every televangelist I’ve ever heard is inauthentic. Kavanaugh’s defense and denial during his confirmation hearings were inauthentic. Comer’s claims about anything are inauthentic. The rationale behind many recent Supreme Court decisions is absolutely inauthentic. Trump’s bone spur diagnosis, his claimed height and weight, his golf scores and his tan are inauthentic…
I have complete faith that Biden will not let the Israel-Gaza war turn into his own personal Viet Nam. Is my faith misguided or do you,too, feel confident that Biden will have the US stop sending bombs or find a way for a cease fire?
I hope so! I do not want this to overshadow all the positive things Biden has accomplished!
Seriously! I hope he has more up his sleeve with this one.
Wonderful to see all the good news that’s piling up – snowballing, really!
Simon, I deeply respect your data-driven selection of which races you direct our Hopium efforts to. To attain results, we have to concentrate our efforts. Do I understand your comment below to mean that the fight to reelect Senators Sherrod Brown (Ohio) and Jon Tester (Montana) will primarily be left to others? Hopium is, after all, one of many organizations fighting the good battle in 2024!
"Some have asked about our strategy for the cycle – we will only be helping non-incumbents"
I take it to mean that this is a relatively small operation run by an individual, so we as a group can only choose a couple projects or run the risk of spreading our energies too thin. This is Simon's site, and these are the projects he wants to focus on. That doesn't mean other races aren't worthwhile or necessary. Obviously any one of us as an individual can do more in different campaigns if we so choose.
Good points.
Thanks, Jerrod. I watched Biden's comments at the Correspondent's dinner and he was so funny I would have voted for him simply for his sense of humor alone. Fascists aren't funny and let's keep working hard to keep them out.
Such a great point, Susan! Has anybody ever seen the Dumpster laugh at anything? Or make a "joke" that wasn't just flat-out cruelty?
Not at all - you cannot get a laugh out of that which has no sense of humor!
Hi Simon — nice poll roundup. You can add another to your list: a 3/29 Data for Progress poll showing Biden up 44 to 43.
Sorry, I mean 47-46.
Thank you, Jarrod for the positive outlook.
I just remember what happened with Gore and Ralph Nader....
So do I. Honestly though I can't help but feel people are much more engaged than they were back then. The way I see it it's our job to accelerate that trend! Plus we have much better tools at our disposal to do so than we did then. Like the Dos Equis slogan "Stay thirsty my friends" I say " Stay vigilant my friends"