Nate Cohn

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

I should note that this is methodologically identical to our live polling from last fall But Michigan was a real struggle. We cut our responses there to 500 (v 650 elsewhere), due to bad productivity. High design effect required weight changes. All described in method page. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

I don't think this is simple about name recognition. In Iowa, where the campaign is well underway and Warren led among Iowa caucus-goers: Trump+1, Trump 45, Biden 44 Trump+3, Trump 47, Sanders 44 Trump+4, Trump 45, Buttigieg 41 Trump +6, Trump 47, Warren 40 — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

I don't think this is simple about name recognition. In Iowa, where the campaign is well underway and Warren led among Iowa caucus-goers: Trump+1, Trump 45, Biden 44 Trump+3, Trump 47, Sanders 44 Trump+4, Trump 45, Buttigieg 41 Trump +7, Trump 46, Warren 40 — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

Obviously, white working class voters are a group pollsters have struggled with in recent years, especially in state polls. We also do a lot that can help us here that others don't, like strata on party x region, weighting on education, and response rate adjustment on turnout — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

2) Unlike national polls, we should Trump holding up with white, working class voters. Take the Fox poll v. Biden yesterday : White, no degree. Fox: 37/50, Upshot: 34/58 White, college. Fox: 50/42, Upshot: 50/41 Hispanic. Fox: 60/28, Upshot: 63/29 Black. Fox: 89/6, Upshot: 82/8 — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

The main difference between our polls and recent national polls, to me, stems from two things. 1) The EC-battleground gap, which was 4 points in '16 and could easily grow in '20, esp among RVs. This is basically what we thought the result should look like, back in July https://t.co/LfnEI45ElY — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

Crosstabs and methodology here. Unlike most state polls, we're weighted by education Unlike most national polls, we're weighted (and stratified for that matter) on party registration, so we have the right number of reg Dems/reg GOP in each state https://t.co/RzjxBLQtWF — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

New Times/Siena polls show Trump highly competitive in the six closest states carried by the president in '16: Biden+2, Biden 46 to Trump 45 Even, Sanders 45, Trump 45 Trump+2, Trump 46, Warren 44 2016 result in these states was Trump+2, 48 to 46 https://t.co/lOTo3Vx8cc https://t.co/wQjUdeRXSv — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

If you want to know how Michigan would vote if it was as well educated as Massachusetts, there's a new Emerson College poll out there tonight https://t.co/phBFXNaykL — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

Yes, as released earlier this week by Siena: Inquiry was 51/44 Impeach and remove was 44/52 Both were up slightly from the first two weeks, when it was 50/45 and 43/53 https://t.co/wTBbPF4ED5 — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

A lot of these state have very good data to work with too, since 5/7 have party registration on the file. In 2018, our average error across 10 polls over the final 3 weeks in these states was 2.5 points, and 1 pt if they had been compiled together as one poll — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

I think it's a really good set of polls. We've done statewide polls in PA/FL/AZ/NC before and 3 of 4 CDs in Iowa, and we really do learn quite a bit the first time we poll a state, that helps a lot on the second take. (tho Michigan is a mess, as live poll veterans will recall) — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

The national polls have a pretty clear story today. You'll get the view in the battlegrounds tomorrow, when we release results in Penn., Mich., Wisc., Fla., Ariz., N.C. and Iowa. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

You'll also get general election numbers in Iowa, where we're also asking about Buttigeig v. Trump — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

Monday morning: Times/Siena results for Biden/Warren/Sanders v. Trump in the six closest states carried by the president in 2016: Mich., Penn., Wisc., Fla., Ariz. and N.C — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@ElectProject yeah, it basically has nothing to do with demographic change-- it's about trump and well educated voters — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

I am not convinced that Trump's standing is any better in TX than many traditional battlegrounds. I don't know whether there's a candidate poised to exploit it (Beto's socially liberal, kind of centrist econ shtick is a decent way), but I do think the opening is real — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

I do think there is one area of substantive disagreement with some people who @ me: I really think the Texas shift is real (implication being it's not because of Beto) and I think people continue to underestimate what's going on there. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@jonathanchait watching a guy stand up on tables to fight some rando who he leads by 15 in a blue state would be boring too — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

Wendy Davis is a known figure, despite losing by like 30 points or whatever in a boring election year, simply bc of the sheer mystique of blue texas. This is powerful stuff he was able to tap into, and it gave him incredible standing heading into this presidential race — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

But I genuinely don't believe you had to be Beto to become a phenom running in Texas in 2018 against Ted Cruz. He did it well, and I think he outperformed what others would have done. But like, even a mediocre candidate like Ossoff became a national phenom bc of context. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

It might have been comical if Beto had gotten up on tables in an NJ SEN race against a rando that he led by 15. He certainly wouldn't have been a natl phenom. If he had given a DNC speech in 04, it would have been forgotten. That's not an insult! It's like 99% of politicians — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

And Luke Skywalker, I would note, would probably lose badly in a super-hero primary. I'm not the best qualified person to judge this but like superman can like fly and stuff. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

I am surprised by the ferocity of the pushback here. Like, would Luke Skywalker be one of the all-time great heros if he had featured in a film where he faced off against routine criminals in the streets of Philly? It matters that it was Darth Vader and for control of the galaxy! — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@SLSFO @chrislhayes @cd_hooks that was the number in the exit poll for the people who actually voted — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@PeterHamby even so, my point is not that there is no candidate effect for beto. perhaps he did a point, two, maybe three better. i can't run the counterfactual and, as i said, he's an above average candidate. but the core thing that's happened in texas is the president of the united states — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@PeterHamby and that's where we disagree. i think it's quite easy to imagine another candidate getting close, as beto did. there are basically no places in the country where republicans for federal office managed to win comfortably in places where trump's approval was even — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@PeterHamby this crosstab is more closely correlated with presidential approval than the similar national house vote, which at the district level was unprecedentedly correlated with presidential vote — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@PeterHamby putting aside the snark: there's *tons* of evidence of candidates mattering. but this is not one of them, and at best this is highly debatable https://t.co/iSjR67xp1I — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@PeterHamby this is the kind of bad take that i thought had died off a few years ago - ignoring the fundamentals in a highly polarized federal election that was unprecedentedly correlated with presidential approval — PolitiTweet.org