****BRAND NEW POLL**** Kamala Harris Opens Up Eight Point Lead

[DemocratSinceBirth]

Link to tweet

[SoFlaBro]

1. Orange Bastard is about to fucking shit his pants at the latest news. Piss on that fucking orange turd.

[Tribetime]

28. That was my first thought twitter storm incoming

[SoFlaBro]

29. Orange Bastard dogfucked his chances with the stupid assed shit he says and fucking does.

[kimbutgar]

52. Love your phasing!❤️

[BlueWaveNeverEnd]

71. expect Trump and Shady Vance to go all in with the racist rhetoric

[mucholderthandirt]

82. Time for another assassination attempt. He'll make history as the only president/former to get shot at three times!

Our hero! Taking another bullet for his country! Rah rah rah!

[LexVegas]

2. Let's go!!! nt

[GreenWave]

3. Sweet reality setting in, at long last!

[SheilaAnn]

15. It seems the more attempts at trying to kill him by his own people, the higher her numbers go. Funny that..LOL. n/t

[Butterflylady]

4. Evidently....

The attempted "assassination" didn't help his campaign.

[jimfields33]

54. This is pre assassination attempt.

https://survey.mrxsurveys.com/orc/pollingresults/Big-Village-Political-Poll-09.15.24.pdf

[Kingofalldems]

61. So what?

[jimfields33]

69. I was replying to the reply above that said the assassination

attempt didn’t show an any support which makes since because the poll was 11-15 September. I do research.. Perhaps you missed the previous reply I was answering. Happens.

I stand by my informative post.

[epreic01]

5. When

Was this poll conducted?

[Wednesdays]

6. Great news, but take nothing for granted. GOTV!

There will be only one poll that matters in 2024. If we get out the vote, we win. If we don't get out the vote, we lose. It's as simple as that.

[PCIntern]

59. Really?

I thought I could stay home. Hadn’t thought of that…

[Wednesdays]

60. Naturally, us political junkies won't stay home

It's the ones who have to be nudged into voting that will make the difference.

[Sugarcoated]

63. Those types of people aren't reading DU

[Wednesdays]

67. Exactly. That's why it's up to us to get them out to vote. nt

[Sugarcoated]

68. Everyone at DU is working their asses off

to GOTV. Just saying.

[Wednesdays]

72. And I'm here to encourage their awesome work.

[kcr]

81. It's not encouraging

to dampen enthusiasm. If people on DU are excited about a good poll, just let them. It doesn't hurt anything.

[Wednesdays]

84. Amen! nt

[Hela]

7. No brakes!

"We'll sleep when we're dead."
- Gus Walz's Dad

[Johnny2X2X]

8. 3 point swing from last round for this pollster

Was Harris +5.

[everyonematters]

9. It's not a highly rated pollster.

[kansasobama]

11. True but at least a positive trend

[NoRethugFriends]

12. Very low rated to be specific

[lees1975]

16. Highly rated by whom? Other pollsters or media outlets that use specific pollsters?

Or one of the aggregates?

And my response to that is, so what? Let's see the networks jump on this one like they do the ones when Trump is ahead by one and they make it sound like that's something at 45-44%.

This seems to be more consistent with some of the daily newspaper polls popping up in some red states showing Trump losing a lot of support. And consistent with the kind of numbers Democrats seem to be getting when it comes to voter registration.

[iemanja]

25. 538 has it rated 232, or 1.2 stars

It's not wise to judge polls based on what you want to hear.

[lees1975]

34. 538's credibility is shot to hell.

After not being able to weed out fake Trumpie-paid polls and still seeming to have a problem with that. So they're a lower rated poll according to 538. What does 538 know about it?

[iemanja]

36. As opposed to what?

Your view that it's highly esteemed because you like what it says? 535 uses statistical analysis. What do you use?

[lees1975]

40. 538 is an aggregate, not a "statistical analysis."

How do they determine that this poll is better than that poll? Some of their "lower rated" polls were a lot more accurate than their "higher rated" polls in the last election, and in the mid-terms. Most of these are corporate marketing outlets that do politics on the side. The odds are that one poll somewhere will be right, just like a broken clock is right twice a day.

Their accuracy, their margins of error and their past record have not convinced me to trust their results.

[iemanja]

41. which?

which were more accurate?

The people that work at 538 are statisticians. They analyze and rank the polls based on statistical methods.

Large margins of error and inherent biases are why the polls are ranked and weighted within their averages.

[lees1975]

73. They're not trustworthy, they haven't been accurate and I place no value on their analysis, or RCP or BTRTN.

Evidence of bias in all three, and of error. Big Village is just another marketing firm poll, google their website, looks like most others, the criticism tends to be that it tilts a little in favor of the right politically and economically, must have a reasonably good reputation in the marketing world given that its staff is a bit larger than most, as are its poll sample sizes.

Clearly, not an outlier, given multiple other polls that now have Harris up by 6-7 points nationally.

[Demsrule86]

76. They really don't.

[RidinWithHarris]

39. At least if their low rating isn't just due to sloppy polling, but poor modeling...

...then there's still good news to be seen in the +3 gain for Harris under the same model.

[iemanja]

42. true

[Shermann]

13. It's looking like the RFK Jr. boost was a dead cat bounce! nt

[Ellipsis]

14. "dead bear".

[Shermann]

18. Of course! The dead bear bounce!

[dchill]

31. And dead whale. And dog. And worm.

So much death!

[Fiendish Thingy]

17. Never heard of Big Village

I don’t think,they are a reputable pollster.

I’d put this one in the outlier pile.

[Self Esteem]

21. They're not. It's an opt-in online panel survey.

[Deminpenn]

70. All polls are essentially "opt in" because

when a person is contacted by a pollster, they either opt to respond or opt not to.

Pollsters collect demographic information at the end so they can correctly weight the responses as to minimize potential bias.

As for 538, iirc, they use a bunch of fudge factors in rating the pollsters. I don't take their ratings seriously. Maybe you shouldn't either.

[Self Esteem]

78. I don't take this poll seriously. It's on par with SurveyMonkey.

They're rated so poorly because they've only been around polling since 2022 and their midterm 2022 polls were off. They had Democrats winning the national congressional vote 50-46 (+4) and they actually lost it by 3, so, that's a swing of seven. Big miss.

[Deminpenn]

79. I don't take poll rankings seriously

The best way to evaluate any poll is to look at its cross-tabs and marginal frequency report, if it has one, then use your critical thinking skills.

[Self Esteem]

86. I think the best way to evaluate a poll is to review their past successes.

And they were way off in 2022.

[Deminpenn]

87. Past is not prologue

nt

[Self Esteem]

88. Copout argument really.

[MontanaFarmer]

27. Agree, not a great outfit.

Their total for VP Harris matches pretty well with others since the debate though. That's the big one for me. She's routinely hitting 50 in the big national polls now. Yougov, ABC, morning consult, RMG, leger have all had her at 50 plus. That feels significant.

[onetexan]

47. Agree. Let's see if within the next several days the other A+ rated polls you mentioned will reflect such.

Some media outlets are still citing 47 Harris to 45 TFG, which is old. Kamala's consistently been hitting 50 the past week across multiple better rated polls.

[GB_RN]

50. Yeah, Not Good.

Opt-in web survey isn’t exactly going to be random (population-wise*), and susceptible to being poll-bombed.

*You’re not likely to get the correct balance of minorities, “low info” voters or party affiliation. There’s going overlap between categories, but the people who respond are more likely to be affluent (meaning middle-class, with Internet access & higher education), highly partisan and (or more partisan than in a randomized , controlled survey). That’s going to be hard to correct for, especially if the survey is bombed by one side or another. And in light of all those factors, the end result is likely to be skewed, even if the pollster has honest intentions.

All that being said, I’m not a statistician. But between an undergrad degree in Biology, two master degrees and a BS in nursing, I’ve had a number of stats classes, enough to know that this type of poll is not trustworthy.

[Fiendish Thingy]

66. It's the trend that matters. Nt

[Doodley]

19. Love it!

[obamanut2012]

20. Nope, not a legit pollster

[Kingofalldems]

24. So you say.

[obamanut2012]

45. I say it because it is true, it is a fact

[dchill]

33. They're legit. Legitimacy is relative.

All polls are somewhat legit.

[obamanut2012]

46. No, it isn't -- it isn't even a poll

It is an opt-in, online survey.

[dchill]

49. How is a survey not a poll?

538 thinks it's a poll.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

51. The respondents are recruited online

Then controls are placed to approximate a random sample. It's how respected pollsters like Pew, Marist, and YouGov produce their samples. It's not a poll you can DU or Freep.

[onenote]

55. "Legitimacy is relative" -- is that sort of like "alternative facts"?

[dchill]

77. It's a fact. No alternative. It's "legitimate enough."...

...to be in the 538 aggregate.

[Tribetime]

22. In line with Iowa poll showing a potential 4% shift towards Harris

From Biden in 2020

[DemocratSinceBirth]

48. Good catch .

Someone did the math and if she's down four in IA she's up 8.6 points nationally.

[groundloop]

56. How about the handful of swing states that are going to decide the election?

Unfortunately, with the electoral college, only a very few states matter.

I'll take any good news concerning this election, but 2016 is still too fresh in my mind when Hillary won by around 2.3% and the orange bastard still slithered into the White House. But yes, polls/surveys indicating an upward trend are good.

[Tribetime]

57. The Iowa pollster was at 9% most everyone else had a close race

In 2016 she's considered the Gold Standard of pollsters...I know each State is different but I like my chances if Iowa stays at 4%

[DemocratSinceBirth]

58. I doubt she's up 9 points nationally

But if she was she's winning WI, MI, PA, AZ, GA, and NC, and FL, OH, and TX are in play.

[Johnny2X2X]

23. They are a legit pollster

They’re included in the 538 average. Not one of the highest rated ones, but a good data point none the less.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

53. The gold standard IA poll has Harris down four

If you impute those numbers you get a 8.6 point national lead

[Sogo]

90. I don't understand what you mean by "impute those numbers."

[33taw]

26. Do we know if they take into account newly registered voters? That could be a game changer.

[lees1975]

43. I've seen two pieces on this, and the answer is no.

There's no precedent for a candidate shift a few months before the election and it doesn't appear that any of the pollsters, regardless of their "rating" have taken into account the fact that their models may very well be outdated. Gosh, even Steve Kornacki admitted that.

[RandySF]

30. Big outlier

[ColinC]

35. It's an outlier but only by a few points

It’s consistent with her being substantially in the lead and at or around 50%like that last few polls have shown. But more than anything it reinforces the poll with Trump in the lead as the biggest outlier.

[obamanut2012]

44. It is not a legitimate poll

[ColinC]

74. It's a legitimate poll but not the best one...

[Johnny2X2X]

83. Agree

There have been 24 polls added to 538 since the debates. 21 of them have Harris +4 or more. One of them has Harris +2. 2 of them, from the same pollster have Trump +3 or +4. Those Trump polls are the outliers. These newest polls are less of an outlier, but still a little bit outside.

It was true when Biden was losing to Biden and it's true today, the side who is complaining about the polls and trying to look only at outliers is the side that is losing, period.

[Deminpenn]

80. If you believe in MOE, then these results are within that of other polls

Theoretically a candidate's percentage can move up or down with it. Harris at 52 is perhaps closer to her high end and 43 is closer to his low end.

[Torchlight]

32. Mr. trump's September is looking worse than his August.

Doesn't take a raft of annoying sea-lions to conlclude it's only going to get worse for him as time goes on.

[ToxMarz]

37. I think the likely voter polls have the most upside for Harris

Trump likely voters are pretty much written in stone and not that difficult to identify. Harris has shown she has the ability to expand the likely voters roles from previously considered not-likely voters. These will always be under reported since the polling sample methods rely on historical known data/demograhics.

[ffr]

38. Queue the panic buttons at

all the news organizations. The horse race is getting out of hand.

"Dump every negative story you've got on Harris and Walz and pump out the Both Sides Do It nonsense. If this keeps up, people will tune and and elect someone who's overqualified. We cannot have that. It's bad for viewership!!"

[live love laugh]

62. Uh oh I smell another assassination attempt.

[Kingofalldems]

64. Kick this one.

[JCMach1]

65. My key take away is that it seems like she is 50+% now

Nationally and doing well in battleground states.

Would not even be slightly close but for the EC.

[Demsrule86]

75. I was the 100th rec...going to play the lottery. Thanks for this.

[Johnny2X2X]

85. 3 big polls today

This one, Monmouth Harris +5 and Morning Consult Harris +6.

[onetexan]

89. whose the poller & are they reliable?