Next month, I spoke with Mark Mitchell, the mind researcher at Rasmussen Reports, about Kamala’s jump in the polls and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s effect on the national contest. Things have certainly changed since therefore as Trump has gained momentum in the elections, betting areas, and Nate Silver’s election projection unit. So I followed up with Mitchell to talk about new tidbits in the culture, including the most recent poll from New York Times/Siena College showing Donald Trump trailing Kamala Harris in the lead.
Advertisement
Unlike the folks at Rasmussen Reports, this development caught some people by surprise. Mitchell’s only unexpected finding was that the NYT/Siena poll had n’t oversampled Biden supporters as they have in the past. ” I was shocked to see they did n’t oversample Biden supporters like many others are,” Mitchell said, noting that the sample only had 3 % more Biden voters than 2020. Rasmussen uses a 4 % margin, so the NYT/Siena ballot was more healthy than he had expected.
I recently covered the surveys and how the New York Times ‘ chief political analyst, Nate Cohn, attempted to minimize the findings. In spite of Kamala Harris ‘ campaign’s struggles to gain traction, Mitchell thinks that Cohn is trying to calm Democrats ‘ nerves in the background.
” What offends us is the’ absence of polling’ opinion”, Mitchell said, “because, as one of the most famous polls, we have been putting out a huge amount of surveys that agree with them that Trump is winning. They are contemptuous of elections they disagree with, which, in my opinion, shows their natural bias”.
Probably most telling was Mitchell’s reaction to Nate Cohn’s wonder at Trump retaking the result. Cohn claimed that this was Trump’s first federal result in more than a fortnight. Rasmussen had consistently shown Trump as the leader, according to Yet Mitchell, who stated,” We put out three independent and non-partisan polls on RCP showing Trump winning as well as the only continuous stream of polling results… they just seemed like they did n’t want to consume it.”
Advertisement
Rasmussen has long been criticized by the left as a “partisan” researcher, but with the Times/Siena surveys closely mirroring their information, Mitchell felt vindicated. He addressed the condemnation head-on:” There are three factors we are considered political. One is that we do n’t feel compelled to follow the MSM group-think polling crowd”, he said. ” We will discuss about public opinion with anyone who is truly fascinating, and that is the other.” People who think some voices may become silenced do not like that. Next, we actually poll on third-rail public interest issues that no one will touch. We believe that being concerned about crucial problems is not political.
Prior:  , Rasmussen Information Talks 2024 Polling
But, what is causing this change in favor of Trump? Mitchell offered a more nuanced perspective than many pollsters, who speculated on the wedding jump caused by the Democratic National Convention’s demise. He explained that Kamala Harris did manage to combine some support after the DNC, but as voters start to realize the truth about Kamala Harris, the statistics are starting to revert again to Trump. Polling suggests that Harris may struggle to distance herself from Biden, he said, giving a hint as to the difficulties Harris will face as her campaign progresses.
Advertisement
On battleground state, Mitchell noted that Rasmussen’s surveys showed statistical relationships in important states throughout August, though he believes these numbers may somewhat underestimate Trump’s help. ” If Trump’s quantities start to open back up again, we’re talking about him winning the majority of those state”.
Despite all this, some polls and statistics economists, such as Nate Silver, are projecting a more positive outlook for Trump. Silver’s latest election model gives Trump approximately a 61 % chance of victory, compared to Kamala Harris’s 31 %. In response, Mitchell dismissed these concepts, arguing that they are greatly rely on a range of assumptions and changes. ” We do n’t give them much attention”, Mitchell said, arguing that trends in polling data tell a clearer story of Trump’s momentum.
Past: Rasmussen Reports on Kamala’s ‘ Bounce’ and RFK Jr’s Effect on the Contest
As for the much-anticipated Trump-Harris debate, Mitchell suggested that Harris’s performance was n’t a game-changer. ” She needed a big win because anyone cares about’ professional Trump losses,'” Mitchell remarked, implying that Harris failed to make a lasting effect. The surveys does not move much, and for Harris, that could magic problem heading into November.  ,
Now is the ideal time to show your assistance by becoming a Club part if you enjoy our election insurance and get interviews like this essential for staying informed. Our ability to provide this in-depth protection is largely due to the support of our Club community. Use the password FIGHT to save 60 % off your account and take advantage of our special offer. Visit us today to keep bringing you the important information.
Advertisement
