Which is the better 2024 predictor: polls or special elections?

[RandySF]

When it comes to predicting the 2024 election, it’s choose your own adventure. Republicans can point to national polls finding their likely nominee, former President Donald Trump, leading the likely Democratic nominee, President Joe Biden. Democrats can point to the success that their party has had in special elections since the beginning of 2023.

In the past, special elections have been more predictive of the next election than early general-election polls. But there are reasons to think 2024 could be different. Historically, general-election polls get more predictive during presidential primary season, when voters learn who their choices will be and get to know the candidates. But this year, virtually everyone in America already knows and has an opinion of the two likely nominees. According to 538’s polling averages, 95 percent of Americans have some opinion (either positive or negative) of Trump, and 95 percent have an opinion of how Biden is doing his job as well.*

As for the special elections, Nate Cohn of The New York Times has demonstrated that the types of people who show up to vote in low-turnout elections — whose demographics once favored Republicans — are now more likely to be Biden voters than Trump voters. The more inconsistent voters who might show up in November, though, are a more conservative bunch, Cohn’s analysis found.

As I wrote last fall, personally, I’m torn about which metric to put more stock in. But we’ve gotten some new data since then that makes the two seemingly contradictory indicators easier to reconcile.





https://abcnews.go.com/538/2024-predictor-polls-special-elections/story?id=107369614

[Redleg]

1. I am not an expert in voter behavior but it seems to me...

... that special election turnout is a better predictor because it is based on an actual behavior that occurred whereas the best information polling can provide are behavioral intentions. As a behavioral scientist, we often say that the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. The question to me is whether there have been a sufficient number of special elections in a sufficient number of states to suggest a pattern of behavior.

[Johnny2X2X]

2. Polls will become quite predictive once the campaigns start

Meaningless right now other than to gauge a potential starting line for the candidates.

Polls this Summer will start to become more meaningful once the candidates start campaigning.

On Special Elections, the news has been great. And I can tell you 1 thing, if Dems were losing all these special elections the way Reps have been, the media would be all over it as a sign that Biden is doomed.

[Redleg]

3. Well, the dominant media narrative is part of the problem for Biden

I think you are right that the polls will improve in their predictive power the closer we get to the election.

[Johnny2X2X]

4. The media is all in against Biden right now

Every single economic article, many posted here, are obviously biased.

There were several threads here about the recent poll that came out titled, "62% of Americans living paycheck to paycheck!!!" The articles gave zero context and failed to mention that in 2019, under Trump and before Covid, that number was 80%. So the headline could have just as easily been, "Americans living paycheck to paycheck falls 23% under Biden!" That's the actual reality, less people are living paycheck to paycheck under Biden than were under Trump, those are the facts. But hell, I bet you can't even convince half of DUers of that clear fact.

Similarly, I see the articles about "half of Americans can't afford their rent!" Well? Is that up or down? Since real wages are up, that is wages accounting for inflation, I'd expect that that was higher before Covid under trump than it is now. But that information wasn't included in the articles about that one poll.

People are doing better now than they were under Trump, that's what the data says. Doesn't mean everyone is doing better, just that over all more people are doing better than are doing worse. Where are those articles at? Because that's literally what the data supports.

[Redleg]

6. As you pointed out, the media does a terrible job reporting on economics

More than that, they tend to simply amplify "populist" narratives about the economy based on their discussions with a few patrons at a diner somewhere in the midwest. Actual economic reporting would require more effort.

[Johnny2X2X]

7. Wage growth

Wage growth never got covered when talking g about inflation. You really can’t talk about one without the other. So during the worst of it we saw “Inflation 8.8%!!” But they didn’t include that during that period wage growth was 6 or 7% for everyone and above 10% for low wage workers. So it was literal years worth of only one side of the story and people still can’t even get over that.

The middle class is getting ahead under Biden and was falling behind under Trump. Those are the actual facts.

Doesn’t mean everyone is getting ahead. Some aren’t, and there is more work to do. But the basic fact that real wages are up now vs 2019 needs to be raked about.

[Redleg]

9. Plus the relatively low unemployment

The pundits and business "experts" predicted a recession and now are suprised it hasn't happened.

[brooklynite]

5. Given the choice, Polls....

Because neither Biden nor Trump have been a candidate in the Special Elections.

[Sympthsical]

8. Neither are currently predictive

Special elections often come down to circumstances within a district, each with different socioeconomic make-ups, issues of importance, and events that shape the minds and enthusiasm for voters. If you look at the recent New York election, for example, that had George Santos and that whole circus preceding it. Can a national reading for November be pulled from such a thing? Not really. You can look for trends, as the article does, but even the article concludes with, "Ehhhhh."

Polls are just snapshots of current sentiment. Current sentiment is not what November sentiment will be. They can be useful guides to campaigns. "Oh, I'm down 10% from last time with Latinos in the Southwest? Why is that? What kind of outreach should my campaign be doing to address this? How do we firm those voters up for November?" Unless you're working for a campaign, polls are just objects of kitchen table banter - which is what we do here. We're just talking nonsense to one another for fun. The media talk nonsense for ad revenue.

We don't know what any of this will look like by October. Who's on the ballot? Is some shithead like Kennedy having traction? Now that there's no fantasy "someone else" figure possible, where are voters settling down? What does enthusiasm look like? What events or revelations or issues are in the news and having effects? And that fantasy candidate is really important for Democrats to keep in mind when looking at current poll numbers. I know DU hates hearing it, but most people did not want President Biden to run for a second term. Not even most Democrats. So that "anyone else" and lack of enthusiasm may be the conventional feeling among voters now, but it will not remain by November. Because by November there is no "anyone else." There's only going to be final choices on that ballot. So these "not feeling it, I want someone else" types are either going to fall in line or probably just not vote. You're hoping the former widely outpaces the latter by the election, and have no doubt it's something the campaign is going to work on. The campaign professionals who get paid actual money for their strategies and advice sure as shit know what's out there, even if a portion of lay people are in denial about it.

You can identify potential problems with polls so you can get in front of them, but February polls ain't telling you what November is going to be. October is when I really start looking hard at them. I knew what 2022 was going to look like two weeks out. And I nailed it. It's in my post history. February? Not a thing. Just fun to watch people freak out about.