When you look at state-level election results, fundraising, and the national environment, surprising state polls actually make a lot of sense. Your weekly political data roundup for October 4, 2026.
Hasn't it been established that many state polls, even by
poliical parties or small pollster firms aren't as accurate as more broad polls on issues by large media organizations. If so, then most state based polling averages are mostly a shot in the dark. Given that, isn't just averaging a group of state polls on a state race, merely guessing at a possible reality that may not be close to reality when the election reality is posted?
How can we take this polling data on US Senate and House races and apply it to the state House and Senate races in, for example, my beloved North Carolina?
There are plenty of things MattY could rightfully be called, but "economics blogger" is not one of them. That's a bit of an affront to actual economists and economics bloggers. Noah Smith -now that's an "economics blogger"
An excellent article, empirically based rather than opinion based on 'priors'. Anything can happen in November, as repeated so often - and the post election analysis can consider actual polling bias, should it occur. The real danger is people with agendas using historically out of context polling misses to seek to invalidate results which don't accord with their 'adjusted' predictions.
Really glad for this column. I had been thinking that since 2016 it often seems Republicans have a way of changing the stakes in the last month or even days leading up to the election. It’s hard to trust polls but I feel a little better after this.
It seems like there is more movement in presidential approval and generic ballot this year than in previous midterms, and if that continues through election day, polls from four weeks out are not likely to be that accurate, right?
Hasn't it been established that many state polls, even by
poliical parties or small pollster firms aren't as accurate as more broad polls on issues by large media organizations. If so, then most state based polling averages are mostly a shot in the dark. Given that, isn't just averaging a group of state polls on a state race, merely guessing at a possible reality that may not be close to reality when the election reality is posted?
As an incumbent House member for nearly 6 years, I'd argue that Ashley Hinson should be weighted somewhat as an incumbent.
How can we take this polling data on US Senate and House races and apply it to the state House and Senate races in, for example, my beloved North Carolina?
There are plenty of things MattY could rightfully be called, but "economics blogger" is not one of them. That's a bit of an affront to actual economists and economics bloggers. Noah Smith -now that's an "economics blogger"
Well to be fair, that is how he is identified via Wikipedia, and I believe how he referred to himself for some time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Yglesias
Matt Yglesias, a wojak incarnate animated by the potion from Fantasia
An excellent article, empirically based rather than opinion based on 'priors'. Anything can happen in November, as repeated so often - and the post election analysis can consider actual polling bias, should it occur. The real danger is people with agendas using historically out of context polling misses to seek to invalidate results which don't accord with their 'adjusted' predictions.
Really glad for this column. I had been thinking that since 2016 it often seems Republicans have a way of changing the stakes in the last month or even days leading up to the election. It’s hard to trust polls but I feel a little better after this.
It seems like there is more movement in presidential approval and generic ballot this year than in previous midterms, and if that continues through election day, polls from four weeks out are not likely to be that accurate, right?
Is Indiana so far red that potentials are not even considered?
As far as I’m aware, there is no U.S. Senate election in Indiana this year.