From other data Morris has been supplying, I am surprised so many media members and pollsters keep assuming that people in our country won't quickly change who they vote for when things are not going well economically. When things are going well for most people, cultural issues seem to gain in importance, but when something like 60+percent of the voters see the economy, jobs, inflation, and health care as all going in the wrong direction, then cultural issues don't matter and most voters vote for the person they see as working to help their pocket book and improve their economic situation. Politicians need to remember, "its the economy, stupid" when everything isn't going well in the US.
For quite literally years, I wished I could have 538-quality analysis but in a way where I could actually pay the great people like you doing this work. And now you've made my dream come true! Really informative write-up and I look forward to seeing you further unpack this data and future polls as we inch towards the next election.
great write-up on everything! this kind of analysis makes me proud to be a subscriber, hopefully others will sign-up too so you can do more stuff in the coming year!
you're welcome! i loved the work you and your staff did back at fivethirtyeight in 2024 and it makes me really happy there's still a home for good data journalism.
We really need to refine our definitions of "social democracies" vs. "socialism" in its purest form, in which "the people control the means of production".
My son-in-law is Danish, and his father is Icelandic, and he and my daughter live in Sweden, and so I have had many interesting conversations about these topics.
Basically, a social democracy adheres to capitalism in their economies, but they also have strong social safety nets, universal healthcare, higher taxes on the wealthy, and less income inequality (homeless people are vanishingly rare).
I think the U.S. could learn a lot from the Nordic countries, which consistently rank at the top of the "happiness" scale.
Perhaps Mr. Morris could aggregate some comparative data to enlighten our hardcore capitalists/oligarchs as well as the rest of us on the cost/benefit ratios of each system.
*I very much admire Mr. Morris's work, especially for as young as he is (the same age as my youngest child).
Hi LFCFan, As a Welshman I feel duty bound to point out that the father of 'socialism' was a fellow Welshman - Robert Owen. His motivation was profoundly benevolent and based on trying to improve the lives of those who worked for him. As with any label, the term can be misrepresented and guilt by association with the same term applies! I hope that Mamdani concentrates on being a good mayor and succeeds in reducing costs for New Yorkers, whilst continuing to support crime reduction and quality of life. In the social democracies you refer to (both Nordic and other European nations) there is no aversion to profitable businesses. There is not unfettered capitalism though, there are rights for workers and a commitment to common wealth (e.g. public transport, universal access to healthcare, education etc. The agenda is the promotion of happiness for the many, based on equitable sharing of resources. Of course there are socialist societies where party apparatchiks wield power contrary to the interests of ordinary people and deny democracy. Anyway, the key point is that Mamdani will be judged on results, not centuries old labels. Political philosophies are interesting - but perhaps less interesting than objective psephology, which is why I'm delighted to subscribe to SIN.
Am I reading this right? There were two counties in GA that swung more than 40 points from last year? One Trump+30 to D+15ish and one Trump+15 to D+35?
1. What is up with Emerson? Not an R-aligned pollster, but often seems to get results pretty close to those of R-aligned pollsters.
2. Any theories on why the generic ballot is still just D+3 despite Trump's unpopularity and Dems' actual electoral overperformance? Republicans led by more in the 2010 and 2014 cycles at times when Obama's net approval was a lot higher than Trump's.
Emerson has the big problem that it’s a university pollster with a shoestring budget and has to cut corners with really strong weighting. They rely on some let’s say noisy data providers for phone numbers and online panelists, and also weighted to 2024 turnout which probably hurt them
Hi Elliott, A fantastic analysis. Particularly interested in the detailed consideration of the opinion polls and why some were off. Now looking forward to future Special Elections and the Mid Terms. I look forward to continuing to read SIN and 50+1 to understand how things are progressing. Very grateful for your objective, empirical analysis Elliott, far more informative than the chattering of the expert panels.
Curious if voters had split their ticket more often in 2024 if that would have impacted these elections (save Trump from himself a bit with congressional checks).
I think Elliott is of the view people believed Trump on prices, not just that Trump would perform better on the issue, but believed the actual promise of lowering prices as something the president does (could be wrong going off of memory of a tweet?). Kind of think with less Trump he receives less blame for this being his economy but maybe it's still a "Republican" one?
Totally off subject, but there’s a DC area pop punk cover band called the seven deadlies, and your username reminded me of some good times in my earlier 20s
like this one better off the album (7 deadlies is more what can music make you feel, negatively i think, rather than make you groove, familiar response over time is one aspect)
Can we really say that economy focused voters moved 93 points? These are not necessarily the same voters as in 2024. People’s views of the health of the economy (and this presumably their issue weightings of the economy relative to berthing else) are downstream of partisanship. This just seems like thermostatic politics.
Aren’t the TX & other Republican gerrymanders are based on 2024 results? I know it isn’t anything one should hang one’s hat on, but how might those districts look if one applies the results from last nights elections. Such as the shifts in black, hispanic & youth votes. And what you think the national D+ really is.
Elliott:,please include detailed analysis of what 95% of the analysts missed last night, namely that Dems flipped 13 State House seats in Virginia House of Delegates which hasn’t been accomplished before ever for a plus 60 Dem majority! I was a member there ages ago and am I correct that this magnitude is absolutely unique in this borderline but also deeply rural Southern state which in rural and semi-rural areas is still racist? What does this portend for 2026 not only in Virginia for MOC and absolutely impactful Senate elections in NC, OH, ME, IA, NE, and even KY? This is really important data for you to analyze?? Thank you!
Yes. And just mathematically, if you want to squeeze more seats out of red states you have to turn some R+15 districts into two R+7-8 districts. So an environment that shifts to D+10 is a problem. It’s also how we get massive waves. I don’t think Texas is a true “dummy-mander”, but it’s not going to be a slam dunk at all, particularly if the GOP doesn’t find a way to talk about affordability (which is unlikely- Trump lacks the vocabulary).
My understanding is that there's a real chance of Republicans getting a seat or two less out of the gerrymander than they want in 2026. Not a "dummymander" by any stretch, but also not a guaranteed +5.
There’s no way to predict how stark raving crazy he’ll be 13 months from now but it’s quite possible his positive number will be in the high twenties by then?
From other data Morris has been supplying, I am surprised so many media members and pollsters keep assuming that people in our country won't quickly change who they vote for when things are not going well economically. When things are going well for most people, cultural issues seem to gain in importance, but when something like 60+percent of the voters see the economy, jobs, inflation, and health care as all going in the wrong direction, then cultural issues don't matter and most voters vote for the person they see as working to help their pocket book and improve their economic situation. Politicians need to remember, "its the economy, stupid" when everything isn't going well in the US.
For quite literally years, I wished I could have 538-quality analysis but in a way where I could actually pay the great people like you doing this work. And now you've made my dream come true! Really informative write-up and I look forward to seeing you further unpack this data and future polls as we inch towards the next election.
Not only are you a damn' treasure, note that Mississippi Democrats broke the Republican supermajority in the state senate. https://democrats.org/news/mississippi-democrats-break-republican-supermajority-in-state-senate/
That is the first time in my life, Elliott.
great write-up on everything! this kind of analysis makes me proud to be a subscriber, hopefully others will sign-up too so you can do more stuff in the coming year!
Thanks Brian! Happy you’re here!
you're welcome! i loved the work you and your staff did back at fivethirtyeight in 2024 and it makes me really happy there's still a home for good data journalism.
"And a socialist is now mayor of New York City."
We really need to refine our definitions of "social democracies" vs. "socialism" in its purest form, in which "the people control the means of production".
My son-in-law is Danish, and his father is Icelandic, and he and my daughter live in Sweden, and so I have had many interesting conversations about these topics.
Basically, a social democracy adheres to capitalism in their economies, but they also have strong social safety nets, universal healthcare, higher taxes on the wealthy, and less income inequality (homeless people are vanishingly rare).
I think the U.S. could learn a lot from the Nordic countries, which consistently rank at the top of the "happiness" scale.
Perhaps Mr. Morris could aggregate some comparative data to enlighten our hardcore capitalists/oligarchs as well as the rest of us on the cost/benefit ratios of each system.
*I very much admire Mr. Morris's work, especially for as young as he is (the same age as my youngest child).
Hi LFCFan, As a Welshman I feel duty bound to point out that the father of 'socialism' was a fellow Welshman - Robert Owen. His motivation was profoundly benevolent and based on trying to improve the lives of those who worked for him. As with any label, the term can be misrepresented and guilt by association with the same term applies! I hope that Mamdani concentrates on being a good mayor and succeeds in reducing costs for New Yorkers, whilst continuing to support crime reduction and quality of life. In the social democracies you refer to (both Nordic and other European nations) there is no aversion to profitable businesses. There is not unfettered capitalism though, there are rights for workers and a commitment to common wealth (e.g. public transport, universal access to healthcare, education etc. The agenda is the promotion of happiness for the many, based on equitable sharing of resources. Of course there are socialist societies where party apparatchiks wield power contrary to the interests of ordinary people and deny democracy. Anyway, the key point is that Mamdani will be judged on results, not centuries old labels. Political philosophies are interesting - but perhaps less interesting than objective psephology, which is why I'm delighted to subscribe to SIN.
Am I reading this right? There were two counties in GA that swung more than 40 points from last year? One Trump+30 to D+15ish and one Trump+15 to D+35?
You are reading it right
Two questions:
1. What is up with Emerson? Not an R-aligned pollster, but often seems to get results pretty close to those of R-aligned pollsters.
2. Any theories on why the generic ballot is still just D+3 despite Trump's unpopularity and Dems' actual electoral overperformance? Republicans led by more in the 2010 and 2014 cycles at times when Obama's net approval was a lot higher than Trump's.
Emerson has the big problem that it’s a university pollster with a shoestring budget and has to cut corners with really strong weighting. They rely on some let’s say noisy data providers for phone numbers and online panelists, and also weighted to 2024 turnout which probably hurt them
Hi Elliott, A fantastic analysis. Particularly interested in the detailed consideration of the opinion polls and why some were off. Now looking forward to future Special Elections and the Mid Terms. I look forward to continuing to read SIN and 50+1 to understand how things are progressing. Very grateful for your objective, empirical analysis Elliott, far more informative than the chattering of the expert panels.
Curious if voters had split their ticket more often in 2024 if that would have impacted these elections (save Trump from himself a bit with congressional checks).
I think Elliott is of the view people believed Trump on prices, not just that Trump would perform better on the issue, but believed the actual promise of lowering prices as something the president does (could be wrong going off of memory of a tweet?). Kind of think with less Trump he receives less blame for this being his economy but maybe it's still a "Republican" one?
Totally off subject, but there’s a DC area pop punk cover band called the seven deadlies, and your username reminded me of some good times in my earlier 20s
It's actually a music reference lol, just a different one (MMW, tonic)
https://youtube.com/watch?v=MtIUU23Vt0M&si=5nDDuvEZpyro7KQl
like this one better off the album (7 deadlies is more what can music make you feel, negatively i think, rather than make you groove, familiar response over time is one aspect)
Can we really say that economy focused voters moved 93 points? These are not necessarily the same voters as in 2024. People’s views of the health of the economy (and this presumably their issue weightings of the economy relative to berthing else) are downstream of partisanship. This just seems like thermostatic politics.
Aren’t the TX & other Republican gerrymanders are based on 2024 results? I know it isn’t anything one should hang one’s hat on, but how might those districts look if one applies the results from last nights elections. Such as the shifts in black, hispanic & youth votes. And what you think the national D+ really is.
Great question thanks
Elliott:,please include detailed analysis of what 95% of the analysts missed last night, namely that Dems flipped 13 State House seats in Virginia House of Delegates which hasn’t been accomplished before ever for a plus 60 Dem majority! I was a member there ages ago and am I correct that this magnitude is absolutely unique in this borderline but also deeply rural Southern state which in rural and semi-rural areas is still racist? What does this portend for 2026 not only in Virginia for MOC and absolutely impactful Senate elections in NC, OH, ME, IA, NE, and even KY? This is really important data for you to analyze?? Thank you!
Yes. And just mathematically, if you want to squeeze more seats out of red states you have to turn some R+15 districts into two R+7-8 districts. So an environment that shifts to D+10 is a problem. It’s also how we get massive waves. I don’t think Texas is a true “dummy-mander”, but it’s not going to be a slam dunk at all, particularly if the GOP doesn’t find a way to talk about affordability (which is unlikely- Trump lacks the vocabulary).
If I recall correctly, a lot of those seats in TX rely on the 2024 gains the GOP made in Hispanic voters to be durable. If they're not? Watch out.
My understanding is that there's a real chance of Republicans getting a seat or two less out of the gerrymander than they want in 2026. Not a "dummymander" by any stretch, but also not a guaranteed +5.
There’s no way to predict how stark raving crazy he’ll be 13 months from now but it’s quite possible his positive number will be in the high twenties by then?