I was surprised recently when a good friend and sister progressive activist commented in the course of a discussion about the US Presidential campaign that polls were essentially useless. I was surprised by her statement and explained to her why I disagreed.
I have found that, historically, polling done by reputable, non-partisan companies is a good way to get the general lay of the land at particular moments in time for a competitive election race. However, I never go by any one poll, even one with a good reputation. It is important to look at a mix of them to get a pretty reliable understanding of the state of play.
Here’s a current example. Five days ago a NY Times/Sienna poll reported that the race between Harris and Trump was tied at 47–47. Two days ago a CBS poll had Harris ahead, 52–48, and an NBC poll had her ahead 49–44.
This reminded me of another NY Times poll which came out the day after Biden dropped out of the race July 21. That one had Trump ahead 49–43. Other polls had Biden down but more like by 3 or so points.
So it may be that the NY Times polls are somewhat of an outlier, too negative, for whatever reason.
And that is why it is necessary to look at more than one poll to get the most accurate view of the state of play.
Here’s where things are right now, using that methodology: averaging five reputable polls over the last week, done by CBS, NBC, NY Times, Economist and Forbes, Harris is ahead by about 3 ½ percentage points, 50–46 ½.
Of course, the winner of the national popular vote isn’t who becomes President. If we had that system Trump would never have been President. But he won in 2016 because of the anachronistic Electoral College. It is whoever wins the most of those votes who becomes the winner. That is why, this year, it’s the results in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, North Carolina, Arizona and Nevada that will determine who wins. How do the national polls relate to that?
My understanding is that Harris would need to win the national popular vote by at least 2% to have a chance at winning enough of the battleground states to then win the election. So a 3 ½% margin with six weeks out is good, but not good enough. There’s clearly a need for all of us who get it on the great danger Trump represents to pitch in and do all we can until November 5.
What about the third party candidates?
There have been five polls over the last week and a half that have included Kennedy (still on some ballots despite his [outrageous] support of Trump), Stein, Oliver (Libertarian) and West. Averaging those polls, Kennedy is close to zero, Stein is at 1.2%, Oliver is at ½% and West is at 1.4%.
How is all of this helpful to progressive voters and activists?
One way it’s helpful is that, instead of being demobilized by understandable worry, it can give us hope of defeating Trump, which should then translate into postcard writing, phone calling and door knocking to encourage undecided voters to vote the right way and to increase those numbers. This is important because the race is still much closer than it should be. It is also important because the larger the vote for Harris, the more votes there will be down ballot for US Senate, the House and state and local elections. And progressive candidates almost always benefit from a large voter turnout.
In addition, the bigger the percentage for Harris, the more that will deflate Trump supporters and undercut MAGA’s efforts to disrupt the process leading toward a Harris inauguration on January 20.
Finally, for those whose anger at what US-supported Israel is doing in Gaza, the West Bank and now Lebanon make it hard to vote for Harris, a recent analysis by long-time labor and Black activist Bill Fletcher, Jr. really should be read and considered.
Ted Glick has been a progressive activist, organizer and writer since 1968. He is the author of the recently published books, Burglar for Peace and 21st Century Revolution. More info can be found at https://tedglick.com
