Dave Wasserman

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

Take #NY27's June special election, for example. The Republican, Chris Jacobs (R), led 70%-28% in the Election Day count. Once absentees were counted, that lead shrunk to 51%-46% (!). This kind of partisan divide is virtually without precedent. — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

This is why I'm not convinced the "Trump's attacks on mail voting will backfire/depress GOP turnout" narrative is accurate. Trump is currently creating a massive partisan divide between in-person (R) and absentee (D) votes. And absentees are rejected at much higher rates. — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

The risk of a huge shift towards absentee voting isn’t fraud that hurts the GOP. It’s administrative dysfunction & voter inexperience that leads to millions of (disproportionately Dem) ballots not counting. https://t.co/iBw805whb5 — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

@gelliottmorris Pretty simple: I disagree because the history of movement in prez election polls is a really small n of races that might not apply to the current political era. — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

@gelliottmorris I certainly don’t view the prez race as a Toss Up. This far out, I also don’t view it as a 92% race either - perhaps “Likely Biden” with a 75-80% chance. As for our congressional ratings, most districts simply aren’t as closely divided/uncertain as the country. — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

@gelliottmorris Right, it was so stable that all the models showing Clinton with a 90%+ chance to win based on all those stable polls turned out great. — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

@gelliottmorris It’s not the model specs, it’s the notion today’s polls can assure us what the race will look like in Nov. Respectfully, I disagree that it’s possible to measure the uncertainty inherent in the next three months of the race with the precision the model implies. — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

Trump’s numbers atm on Covid & race are absolutely awful. Even so, he only trails Biden by 8% in the 538 average and might only need to crawl back to within 3-4% to win the EC. Trump was within 3% as recently as *April.* After 216, we should all proceed with some caution. — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

To publish a model that says Biden has a 92% chance to win based on today’s polls is a disservice, imo. If the election were today, Biden would have like a 99% chance. But is there a >8% chance the race could shift back in Trump’s direction? Absolutely. https://t.co/CLRa0cd4Xn — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

Kudos to the @nytimes for giving voice to those whose lives/routines have tragically been upended by the virus. https://t.co/bPY8SyTrwz — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

Tonight, went out for a quiet dinner on the sidewalk patio of a neighborhood restaurant. Five minutes later, a few big DHS vehicles hastily pulled up. At first I thought they’d sent agents into Alexandria. But...it was just Chad Wolf in jeans being seated at the next table over. — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

But on balance, weighting whites by education might have gotten Marist closer to the true result in more states. Would it explain the entire gap? No. But would it strongly suggest weighting for education in the future? I'd say so. — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

Now, I should also note that Marist also under-sampled non-college whites (per CPS-based estimates) in #GAGOV, where it was pretty much on target, and in #NVSEN, where it showed Rosen (D) trailing 44-46 in early Oct. (she ultimately won by 5). — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

Here's Marist's breakdown of college/non-college whites in '18 likely voter pools (vs. Census/CPS-based estimates): AZ: 34/32 (32/41) FL: 30/33 (27/40) IN: 37/47 (31/55) MN: 41/45 (39/50) MO: 38/47 (32/52) TN: 32/45 (32/50) WI: 39/48 (34/57) — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

What's one thing these surveys had in common? In all seven cases, non-college whites were seriously under-sampled relative to their share of the actual electorate based on estimates using Census/CPS data compiled after the election. — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

First, we should note that Marist's Oct/Nov 2018 polls were fairly precise even if there was a chronic pro-D *inaccuracy:* MO: McCaskill +3 (actual result -6) IN: Donnelly +3 (-6) AZ: Sinema +6 (+2) FL: Nelson +4 (-0.2) TN: Bredesen -5 (-11) MN: Walz +17 (+12) WI: Evers +10 (+1) — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

I applaud Marist for indeed being one of the most transparent pollsters out there when it comes to its sampling. It also allows us, like Marist, to study what might have led to a chronic pro-D bias in Oct/Nov 2018 polls... 1/ — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

A rural white college+ voter is likelier to vote R than a (sub)urban one. So weight by setting, by all means. But a rural white college+ voter is also likelier to vote D than a rural non-college white voter. Weighting by urban/rural doesn’t obviate need to weight by education. — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

RT @gelliottmorris: I talked to several Midwestern pollsters yesterday who all said the same thing: If a variable is significantly correlat… — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

@LeeMiringoff @maristpoll @Nate_Cohn You mention that education weighting didn’t fix 2018 misses. But big difference between weighting by education and weighting *whites* by education. Which are you referring to? — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

RT @LeeMiringoff: @Redistrict @maristpoll @Nate_Cohn Just one more, here is a link to the full report. https://t.co/ev8kiC2uIe — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

@LeeMiringoff @maristpoll @Nate_Cohn Income not nearly as correlated w/ vote as college, if you compare actual election results & Census data down to precinct level. — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

Awful. I don't plan on putting much stock into @maristpoll state results moving forward. — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

This is a state-level polling atrocity by @maristpoll after what happened in 2016, for all the reasons @Nate_Cohn laid out. — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

@Nate_Cohn I read the story as Marist attempting to justify weighting by urban/suburban/rural *in addition* to education. If Marist isn’t weighting by education (which never crossed my mind), that’s...really bad. — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

RT @JessicaTaylor: 🚨🚨 New @CookPolitical Senate ratings and overview 🚨🚨 Almost 100 days out, Democrats are favored to take back the Senat… — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

Idk, maybe b/c they are Rasmussen? — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

@Nate_Cohn Right. And yes, I acknowledge there are valid methodological concerns about comparing CCES data to live interview polls that I should have noted. I would point out your analysis in June showed a 12 point anti-Trump margin shift among seniors (vs. a 5 point shift overall). — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

@Nate_Cohn Out of curiosity, what are your final '16 pre-election live interview polls averages by race/education and age? — PolitiTweet.org

Dave Wasserman @Redistrict

My latest for @NBCNews: meet the two demographic groups w/ big Trump defections since 2016. https://t.co/5Mo3bpHP4C — PolitiTweet.org