Althouse: "Less than a week before the 2024 presidential election... [u]sing the now-disgraced and shuttered 538 as its unimpeachable source..."

March 11, 2025

"Less than a week before the 2024 presidential election... [u]sing the now-disgraced and shuttered 538 as its unimpeachable source..."

"... the [New York] Times scoffed at a number of the latest polls that showed Trump leading. A 'torrent of polls began arriving just a few weeks ago, one after the other, most showing a victory for Donald J. Trump,' wrote the Times. These polls 'stood out amid the hundreds of others indicating a dead heat in the presidential election.'... [T]he Times accused those pollsters — 37 in all — of being 'focused on lifting Republican enthusiasm before the election' and 'cementing the idea that the only way Mr. Trump can lose to Vice President Kamala Harris is if the election is rigged.'... 'Unlike its competitors, RealClearPolitics does not filter out low-quality polls' and also 'does not weight its averages.' Which is just another way of saying that, unlike 538 (which got the election wrong and has lost so much money and credibility it just closed in disgrace), RCP does not put its thumb on the scale. It lists the polls and offers the averages, and that’s it...."

From "Far-Left NY Times Owes RealClearPolitics Apology After 538 Shutdown" (Breitbart).

26 comments:

Kevin said...: [T]he Times accused those pollsters — 37 in all — of being 'focused on lifting Republican enthusiasm before the election' and 'cementing the idea that the only way Mr. Trump can lose to Vice President Kamala Harris is if the election is rigged.'...

Libs can't handle the truth...which is why they still don't know why they lost, even after Harold Ford explains it to them every weekday at 5PM.; 3/11/25, 1:25 PM
rehajm said...: NYT is what should be shut down. Only for the faithful to a fault it is. Any impression they're committing journalism is you being manipulated to consume and distribute the party's propaganda for midterms...; 3/11/25, 1:30 PM
rehajm said...: ...what's most disturbing is a data oriented website like 538 would be a refreshing change from the usual dreck.; 3/11/25, 1:31 PM
Original Mike said...: 'Unlike its competitors, RealClearPolitics does not filter out low-quality polls' and also 'does not weight its averages.' Which is just another way of saying that, unlike 538 (which got the election wrong and has lost so much money and credibility it just closed in disgrace), RCP does not put its thumb on the scale. It lists the polls and offers the averages, and that’s it...."

Remember Inga (just before she blew up her account) touting the NYT propaganda that their poll reporting was superior because they put their thumb dispassionately on the scale? If the NYT was an honest broker, that argument might have some merit. As it is, they relentlessly push democrat talking points 24/7, and yes, they should apologize.; 3/11/25, 1:35 PM
Ampersand said...: It will always be possible to manipulate poll results. Subtle phrasing, and sample size and selection, are just the obvious ones. The solution is to treat poll results with caution, no matter how boring caution is.; 3/11/25, 1:35 PM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: Libs can't handle the truth

And they can't stop projecting. The whole point of the Democrat-heavy polls the NYT relied upon was that it gave Lefties warm fuzzy feelings about a Kamala win. Her persona was fake. The joy was fake. The polls were fake. But rather than come to a reckoning with their own side, the NYT chose to project it's own sins onto the pollsters playing it straight (or at least trying to).

One of most reliable indicators of what's going on in party politics is to listen to what Corporate Media says about Republicans and you can take it to the bank that they just described what Democrats have already been up to.; 3/11/25, 1:40 PM
John Borell said...: The betting markets did better than the vaunted 538.; 3/11/25, 1:40 PM
doctrev said...: It's nice to sell at the peak of value. Nate Silver is probably laughing somewhere. But the election poll farce had two points of significance. The minor point is that deranged RDS cultists insisted that the polls were reflective of a Trump loss, which illustrates exactly how incompetent they would have been against a multi billion dollar Democrat machine. The major point is far more serious. In America, Canada, and the Ukraine, globalists depend on narrative above literally any other consideration. It makes them easily defeated, but some globalist powers have nukes or easy access to them. Maybe they'll be killed in internal coups, but maybe not.; 3/11/25, 1:42 PM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: It will always be possible to manipulate poll results which is why an average of averages has been a much more reliable indicator of outcomes.; 3/11/25, 1:43 PM
MadisonMan said...: [T]he Times accused those pollsters — 37 in all — of being 'focused on lifting Republican enthusiasm before the election'
NYT, now do the 51 former Intelligence Officers.; 3/11/25, 2:09 PM
Leland said...: 538 lifted the spirits of Inga and Gadfly, before reality crushed them and they decided to disconnect for a few months.; 3/11/25, 2:30 PM
Aggie said...: According to a retired little old lady in Iowa, poll skewing toward a desired result can never happen.; 3/11/25, 2:31 PM
n.n said...: Humans are so predictable in Critical Diversity (i.e. color blocs) Theory, right?; 3/11/25, 2:56 PM
Jim Gust said...: What would be the point of a NYTimes apology? They certainly are not sorry for any of their reporting.; 3/11/25, 3:08 PM
Christopher B said...: Nate Silver rather unapologetically leans left but his departure blew up 538. His 2024 models predicted the two most likely outcomes of the election would be either Trump or Harris sweeping all 7 swing states.; 3/11/25, 3:38 PM
Josephbleau said...: It was widely admitted by Harris’ campaign that their internal poling never showed her to be ahead. Knowing that, we now listen to justifications saying that the NYT weighted polls are more accurate.

The past election was a demonstration that poling is manipulated to give the desired answer, internal polls are accurate, but public pols are not.

So in the future, never believe a poll that publishes its results. That is the only truth in all of this garbage.

I have not heard anymore about the atrocious Des Moines Register poll, did the fake poller ever get sued?; 3/11/25, 4:22 PM
Josephbleau said...: I guess today you don’t ask a question in a comment, you ask grok, the Selzer suit is still in process as of today, but unresolved.; 3/11/25, 4:36 PM
mikee said...: The NYT apologize? It is to laff. As to polling, if they don't provide the raw data for analysis, the poll and/or the story about the poll is usually BS, in my experience.; 3/11/25, 4:40 PM
Jersey Fled said...: I just take the polls and add 3% to the Republicans numbers. I’m usually pretty close using that method.; 3/11/25, 4:50 PM
Jim at said...: When I pay attention to polls (occasionally), it's always RCP.

That way I don't end up gloating about Trump being down eight points in Iowa.; 3/11/25, 5:37 PM
gilbar said...: I'll agree to stipulate, for the sake of argument; that some "polls" WERE fabricated in order to affect voter turnout

remember that late iowa "poll" ?
that claimed that 97% of iowans would be voting for Kammy Harris?
Then it turned out; that it was Just a Little BIT Off ??; 3/11/25, 5:37 PM
Political Junkie said...: RCP > NYT; 3/11/25, 6:52 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: Love the 'Far-Left descriptor.; 3/11/25, 8:20 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: The NYT, the paper of... never having to correct a record.; 3/11/25, 8:24 PM
Oso Negro said...: Oh, the poor readers of the New York Times - without gaslight what illumination would they have?; 3/11/25, 11:06 PM
JIM said...: Apparently, 538 didn't poll well with reality.; 3/12/25, 12:25 AM