Last month, I spoke with Mark Mitchell, the head pollster at Rasmussen Reports, about Kamala’s bounce in the polls and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s impact on the presidential race. Things have definitely changed since then as Trump has gained momentum in the polls, betting markets, and Nate Silver’s election forecast model. So, I followed up with Mitchell to discuss recent developments in the race, including the debate Tuesday night as well as the latest New York Times/Siena College poll, which showed Donald Trump edging ahead of Kamala Harris.
Advertisem*nt
This was a development that took many by surprise — except the folks at Rasmussen Reports. The only thing that Mitchell found surprising was that the NYT/Siena poll hadn’t oversampled Biden supporters as they have in the past. "I was shocked to see they didn’t oversample Biden supporters like many others are," Mitchell told me, pointing out that the sample included just 3% more Biden voters than 2020. Rasmussen uses a 4% margin, so the NYT/Siena poll was more balanced than he had expected.
I previously wrote about the poll and how Nate Cohn, the chief political analyst at the New York Times, tried to downplay the results. Mitchell believes that Cohn is trying to calm the nerves of Democrats behind the scenes, especially after Kamala Harris’s campaign has struggled to gain momentum.
“What offends us is the ‘lack of polling’ comment,” Mitchell said, “because, as one of the most prolific pollsters, we have been putting out a huge amount of polls that agree with them that Trump is winning. They are dismissive of polls they disagree with, which, in my opinion, shows their inherent bias.”
Perhaps most telling was Mitchell’s response to Nate Cohn’s surprise at Trump retaking the lead. Cohn claimed this was Trump’s first national lead in over a month. Yet Mitchell pointed out that Rasmussen had consistently shown Trump in the lead, stating, “We put out three independent and non-partisan polls on RCP showing Trump winning as well as the only continuous daily stream of polling results… they just seemed like they didn’t want to consume it.”
Advertisem*nt
Rasmussen has long been criticized by the left as a "partisan" pollster, but with the Times/Siena poll closely mirroring their data, Mitchell felt vindicated. He addressed the criticism head-on: “There are three reasons we are considered partisan. One is that we don’t feel compelled to follow the MSM group-think polling crowd,” he said. “Two is that we will talk about public opinion with anyone who is genuinely interesting. That is inconvenient for people who believe certain voices should be silenced. Third is that we actually poll on public interest topics that are third-rail and that nobody will touch. We think caring about important issues voters are concerned about isn’t partisan.”
Previous:Rasmussen Reports Talks 2024 Polling
So, what is causing this shift in favor of Trump? While many pollsters attribute it to the honeymoon bounce from the Democratic National Convention fading, Mitchell offered a more nuanced view. He explained that while Kamala Harris had managed to consolidate some support post-DNC, the numbers are starting to revert back to Trump as voters realize the obvious about Kamala Harris. "Polling shows she will have a hard time distancing herself from Biden," he said, hinting at the challenges Harris faces as her campaign moves forward.
Advertisem*nt
On battleground states, Mitchell noted that Rasmussen's polls showed statistical ties in key states throughout August, though he believes these numbers may slightly understate Trump’s support. “If Trump’s numbers start to open back up again, we’re talking about him winning the majority of those states.”
Despite all this, some pollsters and data analysts, such as Nate Silver, are projecting a more favorable outlook for Trump. Silver’s latest election model gives Trump approximately a 61% chance of victory, compared to Kamala Harris’s 31%. In response, Mitchell dismissed these models, arguing that they are heavily reliant on a range of assumptions and adjustments. "We don’t give them much attention," Mitchell said, arguing that trends in polling data tell a clearer story of Trump's momentum.
Previous: Rasmussen Reports on Kamala's 'Bounce' and RFK Jr's Impact on the Race
As for the much-anticipated Trump-Harris debate, Mitchell suggested that Harris’s performance wasn’t a game-changer. "She needed a major win because nobody cares about ‘technical Trump losses,’" Mitchell remarked, implying that Harris failed to make a lasting impact. The polls may not move much, and for Harris, that could spell trouble heading into November.
If you enjoy our election coverage and find interviews like this invaluable for staying informed, now is the perfect time to show your support by becoming a VIP member. Our ability to deliver this in-depth coverage is thanks to the backing of our VIP community. Take advantage of our special offer and get 60% off your membership with the code FIGHT. Join us today and help us continue bringing you the news that matters.
Advertisem*nt
