Harris’s Ghosts from Polling Past
A Commentary By Brian C. Joondeph
In Charles Dickens’s classic “A Christmas Carol,” curmudgeon Ebenezer Scrooge is visited by Christmas past, present, and future ghosts, transforming him into a kinder and more generous soul.
Political polling also creates grouches, especially when we see our favored candidate losing in the polls, or our disliked candidate given a false boost due to the polling sample composition.
What do the polls of elections past tell us about the current presidential race? We know the present as there is no shortage of polls these days. We wish we knew the future as many of us would sleep better at night, or else make sure our passports are renewed, ready to move to a less dystopian country, if any still exist.
As a simple exercise, let’s look at presidential polls from 2016 (Donald Trump versus Hillary Clinton), 2020 (Trump versus Joe Biden), and 2024 (Trump versus Kamala Harris).
We can review popular polling organizations that were active in all three elections and also look at the same point in time, late September, just over a month until the election.
This is the last week of September. The Real Clear Politics average shows Harris up 2.1 points over Trump, with only Rasmussen Reports and Atlas Intel giving Trump a 2 to 3-point lead.
Now let us look at specific polls.
For 2024. Quinnipiac (9/19-9/22) shows a tie. Reuters/Ipsos (9/21-9/23) shows Harris +6. CNN (9/19- 9/22) has Harris +1. Fox News (9/13-9/16) shows Harris +2.
Now look at the same polls eight years ago. The dates don’t match exactly as the polls are not commissioned on identical dates each election cycle but are all in the same general time frame of late September.
For 2016. Quinnipiac (9/22-9/25) showed Clinton +1. Reuters/Ipsos (9/22-9/26) had Clinton +6. CNN (9/28-10/2) also showed Clinton +6. Fox News (9/27-9/29) had Clinton +5.
In other words, late September polls in 2016 showed Clinton had a bigger edge over Trump compared to Harris’s current lead over Trump, but Clinton lost the 2016 election.
Now for 2020. Quinnipiac (9/17- 9/21) had Biden +10. Reuters/Ipsos (9/18-9/22) showed Biden +8. CNN (10/1=10/4) had Biden +16. Fox News (10/3-10/6) showed Biden +10.
Biden went on to win, although with a very small margin based on a handful of battleground states. NPR said of the close election, "Just 44,000 votes in Georgia, Arizona, and Wisconsin separated Biden and Trump from a tie in the Electoral College."
Averaging the four polls noted above for late September, Clinton was +5, Biden was +11, and Harris is currently only +2.
If both Clinton and Biden had big polling leads in late September and the final margins were very narrow, Harris at the same point in time, with smaller polling margins, is likely to lose.
These comparative margins suggest the Democrat candidate will perform 8 to 10 points lower than the polls today indicate. If Harris today only polls a couple of points better than Trump, she will likely lose the general election.
Nate Silver calls the race today “a toss-up.” In 2016, Nate Silver’s 538 Project, on September 27, gave Clinton a 56% chance of winning, compared to Trump at 44%. Today the 538 Project also gives Harris a 56% chance of winning.
Clinton and Harris had the same slight chance of winning their respective elections in late September, and Clinton lost. Does this foreshadow the same fate for Harris?
The conclusion is that Harris is underperforming in the polls compared to Clinton and Biden at the same point in the election cycle. Clinton lost, and Biden closely won, although there is much skepticism over that result.
If Harris is running behind both Clinton and Biden in late September, it is reasonable to surmise, barring any potential October surprises, that Trump is favored to win on November 5.
Brian C. Joondeph, M.D., is a physician and writer.
Follow me on Twitter @retinaldoctor
Substack Dr. Brian’s Substack
Truth Social @BrianJoondeph
LinkedIn @Brian Joondeph
Rasmussen Reports is a media company specializing in the collection, publication and distribution of public opinion information.
We conduct public opinion polls on a variety of topics to inform our audience on events in the news and other topics of interest. To ensure editorial control and independence, we pay for the polls ourselves and generate revenue through the sale of subscriptions, sponsorships, and advertising. Nightly polling on politics, business and lifestyle topics provides the content to update the Rasmussen Reports web site many times each day. If it's in the news, it's in our polls. Additionally, the data drives a daily update newsletter and various media outlets across the country.
Some information, including the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll and commentaries are available for free to the general public. Subscriptions are available for $4.95 a month or 34.95 a year that provide subscribers with exclusive access to more than 20 stories per week on upcoming elections, consumer confidence, and issues that affect us all. For those who are really into the numbers, Platinum Members can review demographic crosstabs and a full history of our data.
To learn more about our methodology, click here.