Three Theories for Why Trump's Primary Results Are Not Matching Expectations – The New York Times

A chronicle of Donald Trump's Crimes or Allegations

Three Theories for Why Trump's Primary Results Are Not Matching Expectations – The New York Times


Advertisement
Subscriber-only Newsletter
He has underperformed the polls in each of the first three contests.

It’s still early in the primary season, but a whiff of a possible polling error is already in the air.
That’s because Donald J. Trump has underperformed the polls in each of the first three contests.
In Iowa, the final 538 polling average showed Mr. Trump leading Nikki Haley by 34 points with a 53 percent share. He ultimately beat her by 32 points with 51 percent. (Ron DeSantis took second.)
In New Hampshire, he led by 18 points with 54 percent. In the end, he won by 11 points with 54 percent.
In South Carolina, Mr. Trump led by 28 points with 62 percent. He ultimately won by 20 points with 60 percent.
In the scheme of primary polls, these aren’t especially large misses. In fact, they’re more accurate than average.
But with Mr. Trump faring well in early general election polls against President Biden, even a modest Trump underperformance in the polls is worth some attention.
So what’s going on? We can’t say anything definitive based on the data at our disposal, but three theories are worth considering.
One of them, described at the bottom, seems especially plausible and consistent with something we’ve written about before: Anti-Trump voters are highly motivated to turn out this cycle. It wouldn’t mean the polls will be wrong in November, but it would be good news for Democrats nonetheless.
One simple explanation is that undecided voters ultimately backed Ms. Haley, the former South Carolina governor.
We are having trouble retrieving the article content.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access.
Already a subscriber? Log in.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Advertisement

source