There's been a poll circulating recently showing Biden in trouble against a Republican challenger

[EarlG]

It's an NBC poll touting "rough numbers" for the president, and showing him trailing a generic Republican by 41% to 47%.

For context though, it might be worth looking back to the last time we had an incumbent Democratic president running for re-election. That would be Barack Obama of course. Let's take a look at what his numbers looked like in the summer and fall of 2011, a year or so ahead of the election...

July 2011: "Republican Candidate" Extends Lead vs. Obama to 47% to 39%.

"Independent registered voters are currently more likely to vote for the Republican candidate (44%) than for Obama (34%)."

https://news.gallup.com/poll/148487/republican-candidate-extends-lead-obama.aspx

(That poll was taken less than two months after the death of Osama bin Laden.)

October 2011: "Generic" Republican Continues to Lead Obama in 2012 Vote. Lead is 46% to 38% among registered voters.

"U.S. registered voters, by 46% to 38%, continue to say they are more likely to vote for the Republican presidential candidate than for Barack Obama in the 2012 presidential election. The generic Republican led by the same eight-percentage-point margin in September, and also held a lead in July."

https://news.gallup.com/poll/150116/generic-republican-continues-lead-obama-vote.aspx

Yet despite those terrible polls, somehow we didn't have to suffer for four years under President Romney. So allow me to state the obvious -- candidates do not run against unnamed, generic opponents.

The presidential election is essentially a three-way choice -- you can either vote for the Democrat, vote for the Republican, or you can throw your vote away (not vote, vote for a spoiler, etc.) Once Republicans have an actual named nominee, voters will be faced with an incredibly stark choice between the incumbent president or his challenger, and that choice will be reflected in future polls.

If Donald Trump becomes the Republican nominee again, voters will have a choice between the incumbent president or the one-term loser that they already rejected four years ago (in favor of the current incumbent). That loser, I might add, has only become more blatantly despicable since the last election, with criminal indictments to boot.

My point is simply that there is a long, long way to go before the 2024 election, and "Biden vs. unnamed generic Republican" polls are essentially predictors of nothing.

[KPN]

1. Great reminder. Thanks Earl!

[lamp_shade]

2. Thank you.

[Srkdqltr]

3. These things turn between one heartbeat and another.

It won't be settled for a long time. Don't obsess about the polls.

[Meadowoak]

4. Everyday brings a new bullshit poll.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

50. Not what he said

[SheilaAnn]

5. I don't know or have heard of one republican person, let alone a challenger that could shine Biden's

boots. Seriously, are people paying attention to all that our President has accomplished in the last couple of years? I feel sort of, not completely sorry for those across the aisle who honestly feel they have a "winner" amongst their motley crew that could even come close to JRB.

[Pantagruel]

6. The concept of fiscally conservative GOP candidate

is always appealing to independents. Then you put a real GOP face on him and the retching begins.

[GopherGal]

8. And the remnants on that face...

after whoever's butt it has been stuck up in in order to secure the GOP nomination: QAnon, TFG, MTG, NRA

[Redleg]

20. Good point- and "fiscal conservative" doesn't mean fiscally responsible

Ronnie Raygun was called a fiscal conservative and he presided over huge deficit spending and asinine tax cuts. I think that most so-called independent voters don't really pay much attention.

[bronxiteforever]

7. K&R Earl! There is a lifetime in politics

before the 2024 election. Miles to go before November ‘24.

[Demsrule86]

9. Thank you Early G...I worked the Obama campaign (both) and when I saw the first

internal poll during the 12 elections, I was horrified. But on election day at 9:30, we knew Obama had won. Incumbents have an advantage and Biden has delivered during his first term

[muriel_volestrangler]

10. "Generic Republican" raises the question: is that "what you'd like to think of as a Republican", ...

... a "proper Republican" in the eyes of the media, someone with the views of an average Republican voter, a typical Republican politician, or the kind of guy (because they won't vote for a woman) that the Republican mob are likely to actually nominate? All the ones before the last would be more acceptable to voters outside the Republican primaries. Because any candidate likely to win the primary will either be a psychopath or doing a good impression of one.

[EarlG]

13. Right, exactly

“Joe Biden or your ideal vision of a Republican candidate” is going to poll differently than “Joe Biden or the actual Republican whom the party has selected.”

It’s like asking “Joe Biden or someone else” — “someone else” might sound appealing, until you find out who that someone else really is.

[onecaliberal]

11. I don't buy any polls. The polling isn't reliable.

[ShazzieB]

34. The reliability of polls does seem to be getting worse and worse as time goes on.

I definitely trust them a lot less than I used to.

[crickets]

12. Great points, EarlG.

Also important to remember that there is no such thing as a "generic Republican" these days.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

14. It's all about the horserace and feeding the newsbeasts.

[MarcA]

74. +1000 n/t

[Freethinker65]

15. Thank you

[Chakaconcarne]

16. Have you ever thought he might be running against Jesus?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

17. 👏👏👏

[MMBeilis]

18. Good job Earl. I wonder how many folks might have alerted on your post without reading it.

Keep the faith.

[Johnny2X2X]

19. Always like this

The incumbent always fairs poorly in these polls before the campaigns are even begun. But the incumbent will be a big favorite once the campaigns get into full on mode.

[Redleg]

21. Especially if running against Trump or Desantis

who currently carry little favor outside the base of fascists, bigots, and mouth-breathers.

[Johnny2X2X]

22. Exactly

And Trump will be thrice indicted and age won't be a factor for the race as Trump is just about as old as Biden.

And make no mistake, no matter how many times he's indicted, Trump will still be the nominee.

[ShazzieB]

41. It kills me when Trump supporters make a big deal out of Biden's age.

The difference between 11/20/1942 and 06/14/1946 is just not significant. The Orange Hellbeast will turn 78 shortly after the 2024 election, and Biden will will be 82. Biden is so much healthier as to render such a small age difference inconsequential.




and Biden is obviously much healthier than the orange hellbeast.

[Mr.Bill]

23. Polls without candidates being named

are one of the dumbest ideas pollsters have ever come up with.

[brooklynite]

24. Here's the simple takeaway....this will be a close election

Whether its Trump or DeSantis, the national vote difference will likely be 3-4%

[KPN]

43. Good God. Hard to believe that it actually will be that close,

but I have no reason to believe otherwise based on the last two elections. I’m sure you are right. Not a lot of wiggle room to spare.

[ShazzieB]

45. I sure hope it's not that close.

Last edited Tue Apr 25, 2023, 05:24 PM - Edit history (1)

If I'm not mistaken, Biden beat Trump by 4.5% in 2020. I would be sad if he didn't do better the second time around, considering everything that's happened since then.

DeSatan is more of a question mark, imo, but I don't see him having a very good chance of winning the nomination, at least not so far.

Then again, an awful lot can happen by then, so who knows.

[oldsoftie]

54. The REAL margin of victory was about 45,000 votes. We cant forget the Electoral College.

Look at the swing states & the margin of victory there. It was a VERY close election. Which still baffles me.

[Farmer-Rick]

49. Funny how that is also the margin of error on this poll

+ or - 3 to 4% isn't the most reliable of polls. Add to that the fact that for some questions they only asked 800 people.

Not the best poll for sure.

[bluestarone]

59. RELIGIOUS people want the end of the world. Why, i don't know

These same YAHOOS support Russia, CHINA. Everything these IDIOTS want here, they could NEVER have in these two countries. Our veterans that died for Democracy, are turning over in their graves.

[Crowman2009]

70. This whole end-times BS is basically a "get out of hell free" card for x-tians interested in murder-

Because they hate they're lives on earth so much since their mutation of christo-facism isn't conquering the country or world like they hoped it would.

[Kali]

25. LOL

saw your subject line and ignored post for a while - thought it was just another debbie downer news article. then eventually noticed you were the author.

[aggiesal]

26. My reaction to this is ''Who cares?'' ...

Pollsters haven't been anywhere near accurate since the 2000 election.
The only poll that will matters is the one taken on Nov. 5th, 2024.

As my motto states: "Democracy is not a spectator sport. VOTE!"

[vlyons]

27. I'm not buying it. Given whatever the hell a "generic" republican is

Consider what a "generic" Republican is these days. A fucking lying coward, who is afraid to say something mean about Trump or Putin. A greedy bastard, who is A-OK with selling guns to anyone and everyone, and refuses to do anything about school shootings. A Christian nationalist, who thinks his religion is the only right religion. An asshole, who can't be bothered if a child gets pregnant from rape or incest. An asshole who believes it's god's will if a woman dies giving childbirth.

I'll bet there will be LOTS of former Republicans, who will vote Dem up and down the ticket in 2024, because "generic" Republican candidates are degenerate assholes.

[Ligyron]

28. It's going to be Biden vs deSatan I fear.

We gotta do something to prop Trump up.

Somebody throw a net over him and shut him up until after the trials and hope he can win the primary if he's somehow sentenced by then.

Although I'd bet they won't have the balls to include actual jail time.

[marble falls]

48. He's going to jail for at least a nominal sentence. It'll only help him with his supporters.

[oldsoftie]

55. I thought that too. But now I dont think Ron can take the pressure.

DeSantis seems to be easily shaken. Trump will say & do anything to rattle DeSantis & he's just not use to that. Trump will call Ron's daughter a whore & Ron wont know how to respond.

[Ligyron]

57. Trump insulted and bullied the entire GOP right off the field back in, '12 was it?.

Time flies...

Anyway, they didn't know how to act either but you'd think someone might have caught a clue by now. But it probably won't be Ron, you're right.

[BumRushDaShow]

29. Back in 2012

Gallup managed to to do the biggest fuck up in their existence and no longer do the "Presidential horse-race" tracking poll -

November 5, 2012
Romney 49%, Obama 48% in Gallup's Final Election Survey
Early voting so far breaks 49% for Obama and 48% for Romney
Gallup Editors

PRINCETON, NJ -- President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney are within one percentage point of each other in Gallup's final pre-election survey of likely voters, with Romney holding 49% of the vote, and Obama 48%. After removing the 3% of undecided voters from the results and allocating their support proportionally to the two major candidates, Gallup's final allocated estimate of the race is 50% for Romney and 49% for Obama.



The survey was conducted as part of Gallup Daily tracking Nov. 1-4.

(snip)

https://news.gallup.com/poll/158519/romney-obama-gallup-final-election-survey.aspx

And eventually the mea culpa had to happen and they released a final analysis of what went wrong (PDF), their partner USA Today officially dropped them as a partner after that, and Gallup no longer does this poll -

Gallup identifies flaws in 2012 election polls


Martha T. Moore
USA TODAY
Published 2:24 p.m. E.T. June 4, 2013 | Updated 5:02 p.m. ET June 4, 2013



WASHINGTON – Pollsters at Gallup said Tuesday they have identified flawed methods that contributed to their incorrect prediction that Mitt Romney would win the 2012 presidential election, but they are still working to determine how to better identify who is likely to vote.

The survey firm undertook a far-reaching review of its operations after its surveys came up short in the election: Gallup's final pre-election estimate showed Romney with 49% support to Obama's 48%, with a margin of error of +/-2%. Most polls estimated Obama would win the popular vote by 1 percentage point. Obama won the popular vote by 3.85 points.

In pre-election polling, Gallup consistently showed Romney with a 3-percentage point lead over Obama. When Gallup switched to surveying only "likely voters," Romney's edge increased to 4 percentage points.

Gallup, with researchers from the University of Michigan, will experiment with ways to better identify likely voters in surveys during the 2013 governor's races in New Jersey and Virginia. Gallup asks seven questions in its phone surveys to determine whether people are likely to vote – a questionnaire that may rely too much on past voting and on how much "thought" voters have given to the election, Gallup Poll editor in chief Frank Newport said. Though all polling outfits showed an increase of support for Romney among likely voters vs. registered voters, Gallup's bump for Romney was the most extreme. "We really are re-evaluating that from square one," Newport said.

(snip)

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/04/gallup-poll-election-obama-romney/2388921/

We also saw how the "Red Tsunami®" barely became a ripple. Nate Silver refused to do a mea culpa and an analysis of what went wrong and even doubled down on refusing to acknowledge his "data" included and attempted to legitimize RW pollsters like Trafalgar and even included polls created by novice high school students -

Link to tweet

Nate Silver
·
Dec 31, 2022
@NateSilver538
·
Follow
Replying to @NateSilver538
Nate Silver
@NateSilver538
Replying to @Nate_Cohn
Dude, the Ds in your polls are collectively outperforming Biden, who won the popular vote by 4.5 points! I don't know if this is a case where you don't want to throw your editors under the bus, but these are good polls for Ds and the narrative in the story doesn't match the data.
Nate Silver
@NateSilver538
·
Follow
And yes NYT did reach out for comment and we declined to participate because it was clear from preliminary conversations that the premise of their article was dumb and ignored their own role in hyping the red wave *in contradiction* to what 538's forecasts showed.
8:44 AM · Dec 31, 2022

Link to tweet

Nate Silver
·
Dec 31, 2022
@NateSilver538
·
Follow
Replying to @NateSilver538
And yes NYT did reach out for comment and we declined to participate because it was clear from preliminary conversations that the premise of their article was dumb and ignored their own role in hyping the red wave *in contradiction* to what 538's forecasts showed.
Ian
@511Ian
·
Follow
Oh?
Nate Silver
@NateSilver538
Most of the firms you describe as "GOP aligned" do not have any formal affiliation with the GOP (Trafalgar is more ambiguous: we do treat them as partisan). They just have results that are more R than consensus. And BTW they've been among the more accurate pollsters lately.
8:53 AM · Dec 31, 2022

But at least one of his main columnists did an analysis of 538's mess up -

What I Got Wrong In 2022

By Nathaniel Rakich

Dec. 28, 2022, at 6:00 AM


Here’s a prediction that 100 percent, absolutely, positively will come true: I will get something wrong in 2023. Here at FiveThirtyEight, we make a lot of predictions every year; some of them work out, but we can’t get every single one right.  We can, however, learn from our mistakes. That’s why I like to write about everything I got wrong in the previous 12 months.1 I do this for two reasons: First, they’re often unintentionally hilarious (and when you’re a politics reporter, sometimes you need a laugh); second, identifying my blind spots has helped me become a better analyst.

And there’s no shortage of material for this year’s installment. Let’s start with a tweet I wrote on Nov. 6, 2020, shortly after it became clear that Joe Biden had won the presidential race: “Congratulations to Republicans on their victory in the 2022 midterms!” This was obviously meant to be snarky but also to communicate a political tenet: that the president’s party almost always has a bad midterm election. Of course, that tweet wasn’t from 2022, but I also made this argument in January of this year. And for several months thereafter, my analysis was colored by my expectation that 2022 would be a good election year for Republicans. As everyone knows by now, the midterms were a disappointment for Republicans. They won the House — but only barely (they gained just nine seats on net). Meanwhile, Democrats gained a seat in the Senate.

Clearly, I was overly confident in my early prediction. While it is true that the president’s party almost always has a poor midterm, there have been exceptions. And the 2022 midterms turned out to be one of these “asterisk elections,” thanks in no small part to the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization to overturn the constitutional right to abortion. This year I should have been more prepared for the possibility that the ruling could throw a wrench into the election, especially after a draft of the decision was leaked in May. And even after the decision, it took me a while to become convinced that voter anger over Dobbs would prove durable enough to last until Election Day.

It wasn’t until the fall that I revised my expectations from a “red wave” to a “red ripple.” My biggest mistake here was not realizing just how common an “asterisk election” actually is. I often quoted one key stat: that the president’s party had gained House seats in only two of the previous 19 midterm elections. But there were four other midterms where the president’s party lost fewer than 10 House seats — so what happened in 2022 isn’t that rare. I also neglected to remember that the president’s party had lost Senate seats in only 13 of the last 19 midterms. In other words, midterms like 2022 happen about a third of the time — way too frequently to count them out.

(snip)

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/2022-predictions-i-got-wrong/

It would be interesting to see what happens if there were ever a "poll-less" election.

[Hortensis]

60. He's part of why I deliberately stopped watching polls. Like I avoid dirty journalism.

He's actually most consistently wrong about what voters want...when it's to vote Democratic.

[BumRushDaShow]

61. Well he's now out of a job!

https://variety.com/2023/digital/news/fivethirtyeight-nate-silver-leaves-abc-news-disney-layoffs-1235594060/

[FailureToCommunicate]

30. The poll mentioned yesterday (NPR) of young voters sure seemed troubling though.

[llmart]

31. Thank you for being the voice of reason.

I usually don't pay much attention to polls.

[dlk]

32. How statistically significant was the sample?

A poll can be designed for any desired outcome. The MSM is committed to the horse race model and it’s annoying.

[Redleg]

40. And are they still over-sampling conservatives?

I hate the horse race polling aspect, especially this far out from the primaries. The media will surely predict gloom and doom for the Dems, as the always seem to do.

[dlk]

56. Inquiring minds want to know...

n/t

[LakeArenal]

33. I prefer this speculation:

[nuxvomica]

35. So it's like Door Number 3 on a game show

Contestants can keep their winnings or take a chance on what's behind Door Number 3, which is attractive only because it could be anything. Invariably Door Number 3 is a Broyhill dinette set, just as the Republican candidate is invariably a bigoted clown, but you can always imagine something better.

[Joinfortmill]

36. Biden all the way. He earned it.

[Hekate]

37. Thank you for your wise perspective, EarlG

[Qutzupalotl]

38. The last generic Republican they nominated was Mitt Romney.

[Ford_Prefect]

39. More BS push polling to undermine Biden and Democrats!

We've had these every few weeks with BS headlines and conclusions based on 400-odd respondants of dubious reliability.

We called it vaporware in IT. Much asserted with little data to back it.

On the farm we scrape it off our boots.

[asiliveandbreathe]

44. vaporware..Much asserted with little data to back it. On the farm we scrape it off our boots.

Perfect!!!!

[asiliveandbreathe]

42. my point..polls..shmols...what the hell good are they..at any point..other than give the

media talking points..besides..the poll is only as good as how the questions are asked..skew left, skew right..and how insecure is the person being asked..

Thanks EarlG.."My point is simply that there is a long, long way to go before the 2024 election, and "Biden vs. unnamed generic Republican" polls are essentially predictors of nothing."

Even a "named" Republican will skew..depending on the pollster..

[Cha]

46. Thanks for the crucial reminder!

They do love their polls showing the Dems behind.. like the "Big Red Wave" in 2022.

[marble falls]

47. Thanks! Some of us are beginning to show blind panic.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

51. If trump somehow slithers in again ...

[marble falls]

52. Steady on! Hold to the course.

[wryter2000]

53. Thank you!

And it appears all of those Dems who want someone else to run say in a choice between Biden and a Republican, they'll vote for Biden.

[lees1975]

58. On 538, there's a Rasmussen poll showing Biden's job approval at 49%

So I wonder how NBC worded their polling question.

Every poll on 538 has Biden winning against every Republican running, announced or unannounced, including a 16 percent spread over the orange buffoon in the top poll.

Not happening, NBC.

[Polybius]

68. Rasmussen sucks

They overestimated Trump too when no one else had him in the high 40's. And Biden is not leading Trump by 16 points in any national poll. Link if I'm wrong.

[hay rick]

62. The "generic Republican" is so much better than any actual Republican, LOL.

And the Biden is too old polls. He's too old until he's compared with a younger unelectable Democrat or any Republican with an actual name.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

63. 3 choices: Democrat, ReNAZIcan, surrender

[BaronChocula]

64. EXACTLY

MSM/NBC reports these "stats" with no perspective. They do it for the drama. Before this it was uninformed American opinions on the economy - "RECESSION, RECESSION, RECESSION!!!" That was about a year ago, yet here we are. Most of those talking heads know better, but they pander to that ever-present uninformed American anxiety for ratings. Sucks.

[DemocraticPatriot]

65. What the Republicans need is a presidential candidate who is

named "Generic Republican"....

[Buttoneer]

66. Trump is not generic. n/t

[Silent3]

67. Typical for generic vs. specific polling, but still, it's a sad thing...

...more Americans haven't woken up to the deep rot that infects the entire Republican party.

[BidenRocks]

69. These are the same people

that Jimmy Kimmel's helper stopped on Hollywood Blvd and showed them a picture of President Biden.

Only one got it right. He must not have been the unnamed generic person.

Scary stuff!

[halfulglas]

71. Generic candidate polls are worthless.

I remember in the past a lot of those polls showing dems leading generic GOP candidates in red states but that lead evaporated when actual candidates ran. Yes, I know Joe's age is a factor, but that was one of the reasons I didn't want him to run in 2020 but he made me a believer.

[AllyCat]

72. And this election with fired up youth voters who have already

Shown they WILL show up and vote!

[czarjak]

73. But, shouldn't we get back to more wealth for the wealthy policies?

They do have a perfect record for the rich,, after all.