Introducing 538's new 2024 presidential polling averages for Kamala Harris versus Donald Trump.

As of Friday at 10 a.m. Eastern, our average of national polls says Harris has the support of 45.0 percent of voters, while Trump garners 43.5 percent.

That 1.5-percentage-point lead is within our average’s uncertainty interval, which you can think of as a sort of margin of error for our polling averages.

It’s a little weird that they say Harris is “tied” with trump, even though she’s ahead by 1.5%. That seems like a big deal. Margin of error is important, but it’s just factually true that Vice President Harris is up by an average of 1.5%.

I looked back at how 538 treated polls when trump was up by a similar amount:

https://abcnews.go.com/538/polls-after-presidential-debate/story?id=111610497

In 538’s national polling average, Trump now leads by 1.4 percentage points over Biden, while the two candidates were just about tied on June 27, the day of the debate.

So Harris up by 1.5% is actually “tied”, but trump up on Biden by 1.4% is “leads” (and explicitly different from “tied”!). No mention of margin of error in that paragraph.

🤔🤔🤔

  • ryven@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    58·
    3 months ago

    They’re by different writers, and I know on their podcast I have heard people disagree in the past about things like whether a polling difference is meaningful, so maybe they’re just each calling it like they see it.

    • KevonLooney@lemm.eeOP
      101·
      3 months ago

      Yeah, I didn’t check that. It makes sense but they still have editors. I’m not saying there’s some conspiracy to keep Kamala down, but watch for this to coincidentally happen again.

      Being up by 1.5% is huge. Biden being down by 1.4% caused him to drop out.

      • Zaktor@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        11·
        3 months ago

        It’s in the right direction, but Democrats need to overperform nationally to be in good shape in the electoral college. Big movement from where Biden was, but it needs to keep going. A Democrat down 1.4% is almost a sure loss, but a Democrat up 1.5% isn’t a sure win.

      • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
        111·
        3 months ago

        Biden being down by 1.4% caused him to drop out.

        And covid and not being able to string a sentence together and most of his advisors becoming doomers immediately after the debate.

  • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
    561·
    3 months ago

    While it’s good that she’s tied it up- it’s fucking pathetic that this is even a decision to make. That orange piece of shit felon shouldn’t be allowed run.

  • P00ptart@lemmy.world
    351·
    3 months ago

    The big thing here is that polls skew right. They have been for years. This is why Democrats have been winning again and again recently, by large margins. Young people don’t participate in polls. We don’t answer calls from numbers we don’t know. I know I’m calling myself “young” as an elder millennial, but compared to people who answer every call, I am young. That’s why polls skew right, then the election goes left. My generation and younger won’t pick up the phone for numbers we don’t recognize. We grew up in the tech world and know better. Boomers and GenX will pick up the phone and proudly proclaim their position. Recently polls have suggested that the right wing is ahead, yet they keep losing. Because they’re losers, and I’m happy that my generation is blocking that bullshit. I hope the younger generations keep up with ending totalitarian rule and will continue the fight against psychopathy.

    • CitizenKong@lemmy.world
      20·
      3 months ago

      Generally yes, but no reason to get complacent. A large number of young people are also skewing right, particularly young men.

      • arefx@lemmy.ml
        2·
        3 months ago

        Also, the amount of young men for idolize people like Andrew Tate and Jordan Peterson is concerning, but nothing will be done to address it. Social media is just as bad for their appearance and mental health issues as IG beauty standards are for young women, ie mewing, etc.

    • Vanon@lemmy.worldEnglish
      11·
      3 months ago

      There are so many factors. I think raw polling numbers and single polls are problematic , and definitely need to be deciphered, unbiased, combined and aggregated by reputable pros (like Nate Silver and others). Then they actually gain value and accuracy.

  • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.worldEnglish
    26·
    3 months ago

    So Harris up by 1.5% is actually “tied”, but trump up on Biden by 1.4% is “leads” (and explicitly different from “tied”!). No mention of margin of error in that paragraph.

    I don’t mind that. It bothers me when a paper-thin lead is reported as just a “lead” cuz it kills people’s sense of urgency.

  • Coelacanth@feddit.nu
    271·
    3 months ago

    National polling averages are nice and all, but what’s the situation in the critical swing states? Popular vote should be fairly meaningless unless either side is up but like 25 points.

    • Irremarkable@fedia.io
      191·
      3 months ago

      Fairly promising, at least in relation to Biden v Trump numbers

      AZ: mostly even GA: mostly even MI: mostly even, Harris with a lead depending on how much you trust Morning Consult’s numbers MN: Harris leads NV: mostly even WI: mostly even, slight lead for Harris

      If I’m remembering right, most of those had Trump leading prior to Biden dropping out

      • Vanon@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        3 months ago

        There’s some value versus knowing nothing. But until October early voting actually begins, not worth obsessing over. To be fair, their forecast was still one of the better ones for that infamous election, dropping around 60-40 Clinton during election day (NYT was still 90-10). And I’m sure many things were learned from it, maybe even over-corrected, based on '20-22. I’ll be following Nate’s Silver Bulletin this year (he left 538 and took his algorithms).

  • rayyy@lemmy.world
    16·
    3 months ago

    One has momentum and a convention bump coming up. The other is OLD, tired and really WEIRD.

    • AbsentBird@lemm.eeEnglish
      13·
      3 months ago

      Super old, with an atrocious VP. Worst presidential ticket in my lifetime by far.

      • P00ptart@lemmy.world
        3·
        3 months ago

        Same, which is sad because I was 18 when bush was president. But if take bush 1000X over trump.

        • AbsentBird@lemm.eeEnglish
          4·
          3 months ago

          Yeah, I couldn’t stand Bush, but he was a way stronger candidate than trump.

  • meep_launcher@lemm.ee
    101·
    3 months ago

    They didn’t ask me and I’m sure as hell voting.

    Fuck these Chrystal balls we’re voting and we’re winning

  • Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world
    9·
    3 months ago

    Margin of error might have been smaller before than it is now. Makes a ton of sense because the race has changed so rapidly.

  • tjp@lemm.eeEnglish
    102·
    3 months ago

    So Harris up by 1.5% is actually “tied”, but trump up on Biden by 1.4% is “leads”

    Not sure this is what they are doing, but the republican advantage in the electoral college could explain the terminology here. With polls a dead heat, democrats are losing every time.

    • AmidFuror@fedia.io
      12·
      3 months ago

      Was the post edited in the last 5 minutes? Seems it addressed this and gave an example of how it was different for Trump v Biden.

    • Irremarkable@fedia.io
      113·
      3 months ago

      Yeah calling this weird is simply a complete misunderstanding of basic statistics. If the lead is within the margin of error, it’s absolutely fair to call it tied.

  • Omega@lemmy.world
    62·
    3 months ago

    Yeah, because all of the “mainstream” news channels actually skew right, since they’re constantly overcorrecting to appear non-biased.

  • thrawn@lemmy.world
    3·
    3 months ago

    Nate Silver has similar numbers. I don’t have a great deal of faith in polls or poll aggregators, but both of those put together is a good sign.

      • thrawn@lemmy.world
        1·
        3 months ago

        Yeah but he had significantly more pessimistic numbers for Biden from model launch to dropping out. Whether 538 was overly optimistic for the dems or Silver was overly pessimistic, it’s good news either way when both agree Harris is up

  • Nougat@fedia.io
    87·
    3 months ago

    National polls are not relevant to who wins the election for the Presidency.