Pollsters Believe They've Solved Trump Prediction Errors After Two Failed Attempts
In Donald Trump’s most recent election campaign, pollsters believe they successfully tackled the difficulty of identifying his voter base.
TroibNews 
For pollsters aiming to accurately predict an election featuring Donald Trump at the top of the ticket, the third attempt seemed to yield better results, although with some lingering dissatisfaction.
Having missed the mark in 2016 and 2020 by consistently underestimating Trump's support, polls for 2024 appeared to improve, with both popular vote and swing state outcomes falling within the margins of error for overall predictions.
Pollsters believe they have successfully identified Trump voters, a group that previously eluded accurate measurement and contributed to poll inaccuracies in earlier elections.
“In the past, we have had a lot of Trump supporters who have simply refused to answer our questions,” said GOP pollster Whit Ayres. “We call, ‘I'm from the New York Times or The LA Times or The Washington Post, and I'm doing a survey,’ and they go, ‘Well, to hell with you,’ click.”
Despite these improvements, there were still notable missteps. For example, Ann Selzer, a respected pollster known for her accuracy, had to end her long-term association with the Des Moines Register after her firm published a poll just days before Election Day indicating that Vice President Kamala Harris was leading Trump by 3 points in Iowa.
The unexpected results of that poll prompted skepticism, with even Harris’ campaign cautioning against placing too much weight on the findings. Ultimately, Trump won Iowa convincingly, outperforming Harris by over 13 points.
Since 2016, when polls had inaccurately forecasted a significant victory for Hillary Clinton, pollsters have grappled with underestimating Trump’s base. This challenge is specific to Trump-led elections; polling was more reliable during the 2018 and 2022 midterms.
Turnout generally increases in presidential election years, particularly among Trump’s supporters who are distrustful of institutions and harder to reach via surveys.
“The very same Trump voters who don't trust experts, don't trust the media, don't trust science — also don't trust pollsters,” stated Democratic pollster Paul Maslin. “And we found in several states that simply, they were opting out.”
In response to past inaccuracies, researchers adapted their methods this year, as Ayres noted, striving to reach a larger number of Trump voters for more precise predictions. They recalibrated their likely electorate models, placed greater emphasis on specific demographic groups, and revised their outreach to non-college-educated voters, who generally lean Republican.
These adjustments resulted in final polling aggregates indicating dead heats in five swing states, with Trump maintaining significant leads in Arizona and Nevada. The polls also accurately depicted Trump’s appeal to white voters as well as Harris’ weaknesses among Black and Latino men, contributing to Trump’s substantial victory.
The president-elect ended up winning all of the battleground states, a result that pollsters linked to undecided voters leaning disproportionately toward Trump.
“If you look at the past, undecideds tended to not favor Republicans,” remarked GOP pollster Brent Buchanan. “This year, Trump benefited from undecideds.”
While the results on election night aligned with poll predictions, the breadth of Trump’s victories was still startling. Leading up to November 5, many analysts anticipated a prolonged resolution due to the tight races in swing states.
Although final vote tallies were within the polling margin of error in battleground regions, there was a general tendency to underestimate Trump’s support by about 3 points. This discrepancy might stem from Trump drawing last-minute voters who decided after the final surveys were carried out.
In the last week of the campaign, Trump received a notable endorsement from Joe Rogan, which Maslin credited as a factor in Trump's late surge. Buchanan’s analyses showed Trump ahead by 3 points among voters who finalized their decisions in the election's final week.
Pollsters have often pointed to Trump as the primary reason for inaccuracies in 2016 and 2020. “It's a Trump issue, not a Republican issue,” noted Ayres, who carries four decades of experience in GOP polling. Looking ahead to 2028, the first presidential election without Trump in over a decade, Ayres anticipated “we can reasonably expect whatever problems we had getting Trump voters to go away.”
Others, however, expressed reservations.
“It's not like, ‘Oh, great, fine, polling was pretty good this time we can put this to bed,’” Maslin cautioned. “No, of course not. It's an ongoing question. It will continue to be, and it should be.”
Jessica Kline for TROIB News
Having missed the mark in 2016 and 2020 by consistently underestimating Trump's support, polls for 2024 appeared to improve, with both popular vote and swing state outcomes falling within the margins of error for overall predictions.
Pollsters believe they have successfully identified Trump voters, a group that previously eluded accurate measurement and contributed to poll inaccuracies in earlier elections.
“In the past, we have had a lot of Trump supporters who have simply refused to answer our questions,” said GOP pollster Whit Ayres. “We call, ‘I'm from the New York Times or The LA Times or The Washington Post, and I'm doing a survey,’ and they go, ‘Well, to hell with you,’ click.”
Despite these improvements, there were still notable missteps. For example, Ann Selzer, a respected pollster known for her accuracy, had to end her long-term association with the Des Moines Register after her firm published a poll just days before Election Day indicating that Vice President Kamala Harris was leading Trump by 3 points in Iowa.
The unexpected results of that poll prompted skepticism, with even Harris’ campaign cautioning against placing too much weight on the findings. Ultimately, Trump won Iowa convincingly, outperforming Harris by over 13 points.
Since 2016, when polls had inaccurately forecasted a significant victory for Hillary Clinton, pollsters have grappled with underestimating Trump’s base. This challenge is specific to Trump-led elections; polling was more reliable during the 2018 and 2022 midterms.
Turnout generally increases in presidential election years, particularly among Trump’s supporters who are distrustful of institutions and harder to reach via surveys.
“The very same Trump voters who don't trust experts, don't trust the media, don't trust science — also don't trust pollsters,” stated Democratic pollster Paul Maslin. “And we found in several states that simply, they were opting out.”
In response to past inaccuracies, researchers adapted their methods this year, as Ayres noted, striving to reach a larger number of Trump voters for more precise predictions. They recalibrated their likely electorate models, placed greater emphasis on specific demographic groups, and revised their outreach to non-college-educated voters, who generally lean Republican.
These adjustments resulted in final polling aggregates indicating dead heats in five swing states, with Trump maintaining significant leads in Arizona and Nevada. The polls also accurately depicted Trump’s appeal to white voters as well as Harris’ weaknesses among Black and Latino men, contributing to Trump’s substantial victory.
The president-elect ended up winning all of the battleground states, a result that pollsters linked to undecided voters leaning disproportionately toward Trump.
“If you look at the past, undecideds tended to not favor Republicans,” remarked GOP pollster Brent Buchanan. “This year, Trump benefited from undecideds.”
While the results on election night aligned with poll predictions, the breadth of Trump’s victories was still startling. Leading up to November 5, many analysts anticipated a prolonged resolution due to the tight races in swing states.
Although final vote tallies were within the polling margin of error in battleground regions, there was a general tendency to underestimate Trump’s support by about 3 points. This discrepancy might stem from Trump drawing last-minute voters who decided after the final surveys were carried out.
In the last week of the campaign, Trump received a notable endorsement from Joe Rogan, which Maslin credited as a factor in Trump's late surge. Buchanan’s analyses showed Trump ahead by 3 points among voters who finalized their decisions in the election's final week.
Pollsters have often pointed to Trump as the primary reason for inaccuracies in 2016 and 2020. “It's a Trump issue, not a Republican issue,” noted Ayres, who carries four decades of experience in GOP polling. Looking ahead to 2028, the first presidential election without Trump in over a decade, Ayres anticipated “we can reasonably expect whatever problems we had getting Trump voters to go away.”
Others, however, expressed reservations.
“It's not like, ‘Oh, great, fine, polling was pretty good this time we can put this to bed,’” Maslin cautioned. “No, of course not. It's an ongoing question. It will continue to be, and it should be.”
Jessica Kline for TROIB News
