Skip to main content

Is This Election Really a Nail-Biter?

 

I’ve been asked why I don’t think this election will be quite the nail-biter being hyped by the media. Part of my answer, of course, is that the nail-biter narrative is being hyped by the media.

It’s usually a New York Times poll that triggers the nail-biting. Each poll is announced with great fanfare, in bold headlines, always with links to commentary that ripple through the rest of the media. The narrative is invariably that the race is deadlocked. Which happens to coincide with the neck-and-neck, both-sides-are-equally-bad, horserace political coverage in which they’re so deeply invested.

To get some return on that investment, they bend objective reality to make Trump appear reasonable and normal, even as he descends deeper and deeper into madness. The Times has shown that it will always, always sane-wash Trump to make the race appear close, even if it isn’t.

It’s not that their polls are wrong. They’re measuring something, after all. It’s just that what they’re measuring is not predictive, and it’s foolish to treat them as if they are.

The Times’ poll is but one of dozens, many of which are significantly more reliable — both for their methodologies and for their honest reading of the data — and many of which are telling a different story from the one the Times wants to tell. Especially in the battleground states.

But the Times poll has the full force of the Times brand behind it. So when the Times says that the race is neck-and-neck, other media outlets — right down to your local news channel — take notice. Before you know it, even Rachel Maddow calls the race neck-and-neck, at least once per show. Obviously, there’s a herd mentality at work — journalists are flocking to whatever “conventional wisdom” the Times is putting out that day.

My point is that I don’t think the polls are saying what we’re being told they’re saying. But don’t take my word for it. If you must put your faith in polls — as I do not — give your nails a break. Look at more than just the latest Times poll, or at the secondary sources that cite it. Look for polls that are known to be high-quality. Look for the averages of multiple polls. Look for the margin of error, because any result within that margin is virtually meaningless. And look at individual swing states, because they are, unfortunately, the only states that matter in the presidential race.

What you’ll find is that Democrats are generally surging, while Republicans are generally sagging. Exactly what your own instincts are telling you. So let’s just say that polls can be misleading, and let’s try not to be swayed by them.

But there are plenty of other reasons my nails remain unbitten, and they have nothing to do with polls. There’s a lot happening right in front of our eyes, things the legacy media is either ignoring or underplaying.

Democratic advertising has gotten intense, and hard to ignore. Democrats have demolished all fundraising records, and they’re using their windfall to carpet-bomb voters in battleground states. Admittedly, I live in one of those, Michigan, so the commercials here are almost omnipresent, especially on local news.

I’ve long thought it almost impossible to get any message through to a diehard Fox viewer, but when I see Democrats buying time even on Fox, I have to rethink that. Fox’s audience is not monolithic, and there are surely plenty of Trump haters, even there.

But Democrats are also buying major sports programming, including the NFL, which is extremely expensive, but where even the most brain-dead MAGA crazy is a captive audience. There’s a range of commercials rotating in and out, covering most of the party’s agenda. All of those commercials do double and triple duty as online ads, which are also everywhere.

Then there’s the billboards being bought on major highways in every battleground state. Billboards are one of the few media that reach people of all political persuasions, but their messages need to be simple enough to be consumed at 70 mph. Happily, abortion messaging couldn’t be simpler: “Trump wants your daughter to have her rapist’s baby.” Or something.

It’s not that all this advertising will change a lot of minds. Anybody who at this point is truly undecided — as opposed to just telling pollsters they’re undecided — is paying no attention at all. They might not even vote, and they’re not worth chasing down.

And since there is no evidence that Trump’s base can be expanded, the election will inevitably come down to what it always comes down to: Democrat turnout.

When Democrats vote, they win, and nothing about that equation has changed. This was vividly demonstrated in 2018, 2020, and 2022. Why, with the same set of threats we faced then — but even worse — would we assume the country is ready to give Trump another shot at killing us?

So driving turnout is the whole point of the advertising. It targets, not just Democrats, but also that sizeable number of Nikki Haley Republicans who will either vote for Harris-Walz or stay home.

And it’s not just about Harris-Walz. Democrats are also funneling serious money to down-ballot races in all 50 states, possibly for the first time. They’re going after seats at the state and local levels, chipping away at the gerrymandered domination of red-state Republicans.

They’re even investing in Florida, where Rick Scott — the Medicare fraudster masquerading as a senator — is facing a strong and charismatic candidate in Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, who’ll be getting additional help from an abortion rights amendment that’s also on the ballot, not to mention a category-4 hurricane that’s guaranteed to highlight Republican incompetence.

Want more good news? Voter registration is off the charts, almost across the board. Black, white, women, young, old, educated, and Swifties have all seen spikes in registration, just in the last month. If you’re looking for a key driver, maybe even a predictor, of a robust turnout, then the registration numbers — especially among women and young people — will fill your heart.

But the ultimate good news remains the Democratic track record since the fall of Roe v Wade.

Remember last March, when Marilyn Lands, a Democrat, ran for the Alabama state senate. It was for the same seat she’d lost by 5 points two years earlier. But this time she ran on a platform of abortion rights and IVF, and this time she won by 36 points. In freaking Alabama, where Democrats are an endangered species, she took 63 percent of the votes.

No, I don’t think Kamala will carry Alabama. But this is one of many examples of Democrats obliterating the conventional wisdom in off-year and special elections. Yes, the media reported Lands’s victory. But they never saw it coming, and they promptly dropped it down the memory hole.

They have likewise underplayed dozens of state and local elections where legislatures were swung, town councils replaced, crazy school boards ejected, and abortion rights enshrined in state constitutions, all by voters who’d had enough of Republican bullshit. The issues were the same ones we face in November.

And these weren’t polls. They were actual elections, where overwhelming turnout carried the day. To me they speak far louder than any poll.

So the good news is all around us — and I haven’t even scratched the surface — but again, you’d never know it from the media.

Not that we’re out of the woods. Not that there isn’t real danger still. Between the structural impediment of the electoral college, the capricious politics of battleground states, and the various ratfucking schemes being hatched by MAGA, there is still plenty of anxiety to go around.

For me, optimism is always cautious, but it’s still optimism. And better than biting my nails.

 

Comments

  1. I can't help but wonder if the media uses the nail-biter messaging to encourage people to vote. By your description of registration numbers, it's working.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe, but I'm not prepared to give them that much credit.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Courtship of Abdul El-Sayed By, Uh, Fox?

   I understand that it’s hard to keep up with all the things Trump might be angry about on any given day, but it’s interesting to note that he’s now big mad at Fox News over their surprisingly hospitable treatment of Abdul El-Sayed. It’s not often that I say this, but he has a point. Based on two extended interviews — one was a month ago, the other last week — El-Sayed has quickly become Fox’s second favorite Democrat, after Pete Buttigieg. Fox and El-Sayed have been of conspicuous use to each other, and it’s hard to imagine stranger bedfellows. Each interview was over 20 minutes long, which is unusual for any news broadcast. But for a Democratic candidate — let alone for the Senate, let alone from a crucial swing state — that kind of one-on-one time on Fox is utterly unheard of. Trump heard of it, and he wasn’t happy. Both events were good television in their own way. I’ve often complained about the impermeability of the Fox media bubble, and there’s no ...

So Much Lying, So Little Time

   In 1982, William Goldman published a memoir of his time in Hollywood, where he had written the screenplays for Marathon Man , Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid , All the President’s Men , and The Princess Bride , among others. The book had a priceless title, with resonance well beyond the screen trade. It was called Which Lie Did I Tell? And that’s the trouble with lying, isn’t it? How do you keep the lies straight? It’s one thing to keep track of which lie you told to which customer, boss, or spouse — that’s hard enough. But it’s a whole other thing to regularly lie to the media, or to voters, or to other countries. Eventually, you get caught out, even by the most gullible. And credibility is a hard thing to recover. We have been subsumed by a culture of lying, embodied by a Republican Party whose commitment to it predates Trump by at least four decades. They’ve spent that time building a lie machine that has served them extremely well, but is now vis...

Suppose We Do Win Both House and Senate. Then What?

   My friend in Ontario is frustrated, as I can well imagine. As Trump continues to drive our country over a cliff — and drag his country over with it — he has asked me just what difference a blue takeover of Congress might actually make. A good question, in and of itself. But then he asks, “ Even if there is a change in Congress, what could that do if Trump goes around them anyway?” My answer to both was as glib as it was unhelpful: Who knows, I said, but we need to flip Congress anyway. Even if Democrats can capture both House and Senate, their ability to push back will be limited. They’ll be able to prevent things — crazy new laws, egregious appointments, corrupt funding — and that’s not nothing. But prevention isn’t cure, and given Trump’s personal chokehold on the world, a lot of curing will be desperately needed. Over the next two years the headwinds will be fierce. Even a strongly Democratic Congress will have little more than a larger platform fo...