#polling data

[bytesizenetwork]

U.S.-Iran MOU Poll: Why Americans Say Tehran Wins

Thirty-three percent of American voters look at the new Memorandum of Understanding between Washington and Tehran and see a victory for the Islamic Republic. A June 2026 poll conducted by The Hill and HarrisX quantifies a growing domestic unease with the Biden administration’s unwritten diplomatic framework. The survey of 2,500 registered voters reveals that 33.4 percent believe the agreement…

U.S.-Iran MOU Poll: Why Americans Say Tehran Wins

[wat3rm370n]

Smearing real people with synthetic AI slop poll data. 

I feel like using synthetic polls to assert it’s what real people think and feel is almost a sort of slander, mischaracterizing the views of real people with made up and likely manipulated assertions.

The New York Times - This Is What Will Ruin Public Opinion Polling for Good April 6, 2026 A recent Axios story on maternal health policy referred to “findings” that a majority of people trusted their doctors and nurses. On the surface, there’s nothing unusual about that. What wasn’t originally mentioned, however, was that these findings were made up. Clicking through the links revealed (as did a subsequent editor’s note and clarification by Axios) that the public opinion poll was a computer simulation run by the artificial intelligence start-up Aaru. No people were involved in the creation of these opinions. The practice Aaru used is called silicon sampling, and it’s suddenly everywhere. The idea behind silicon sampling is simple and tantalizing. Because large language models can generate responses that emulate human answers, polling companies see an opportunity to use A.I. agents to simulate survey responses at a small fraction of the cost and time required for traditional polling. Phone polling has become exponentially harder. Web polling is too uncertain. Silicon sampling removes the messy, costly part of asking people what they think. But this undermines the very idea of the opinion poll. Public opinion is used to guide policy, politics and social science, and it has value only insofar as it summarizes the beliefs and opinions of actual humans. Using simulations of human opinions in place of the real thing will only worsen our broken information ecosystem, and sow distrust. We should not turn to an artificial society to try to understand our real one.

My letter to reps: 

Synthetic polls should have to be clearly labeled. I don't think AI should be used to "simulate" real people polls because that's never going to be accurate, because AI LLM chatbot technology is very error-prone to begin with, but also garbage in garbage out, the point of polls is to find out what people actually think. But if polls are going to be used that are synthetically generated, then presenting the data as if it's from real humans should NOT be allowed, and such synthetic data ought to be clearly disclosed as such, prominently. 

Please feel free to copy or repurpose for your own letters to reps.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

THE KRAYZEE IS NOW ON STEROIDS

Same as it ever was - this cartoon was first published in 1951

Same as it ever was - this cartoon was first published in 1951

Trump considered firing Noem after the fatal shootings of two protesters by federal officers in Minneapolis in January, but he held off because he didn’t want to appear as giving in to Democrats’ demands for her resignation. Thursday, Senate Majority Leader John Thune acknowledged conversations about Noem’s future had been going on for “a while.” Trump’s allies described him as “livid” and “pissed” after Noem claimed he had signed off on the massive campaign featuring Noem on a horse in front of Mt. Rushmore. Republicans are worried that if Noem mishandled taxpayer money or violated contracting rules, it will provide ammo for Democratic investigators after they win back the House in November.

Regarding Markwayne Mullet to be Noem’s replacement as Persecutor of America, Chuck Shumer posted: “I’ve been asked if I would support Sen. Mullin as Noem’s replacement. The answer is a resounding NO. The rot in DHS is deep, much deeper than any individual. It’s a question of policy not personnel. The Senate should not consider any DHS Secretary nominee until DHS and ICE are reined in.”

A majority of American voters believe that President Trump’s relationship with Iran has made the U.S. less safe, according to a new poll from Fux Snooze:, 51 percent of respondents said Trump’s war with Iran has increased risk for the U.S. 29% said Trump’s war has increased security for the U.S., while 19%t said his war has resulted in “no difference.”.

Oil prices topped $80/barrel Thursday - on their way to the dread $100/barrel that will see Unca Donnie do the TACO quadrille. The Dow lost another 1, 000 points on the news. Now that oil prices are on the rise, key officials have argued they are “doing their best to bring them down,” “the jump will only be temporary,” and “the hikes are worth a geopolitical win Iran.” Presidential blowjobber Karoline Leavitt wrote: “Rest assured, President Trump’s entire energy team, from the White House to the National Energy Dominance Council to Secretaries Wright and Bessent, have been planning for this, and they are all over it!” Asked about prices during a press briefing on Wednesday, she said Maladministration II is “wholeheartedly focused on keeping prices stable.” “It is the president’s belief and his economic team’s belief that the economy continues to be very strong. It’s robust and will be able to weather any of the temporary impacts of Operation Epic Fury.” Energy Secretary Chris Wright told Fux Snooze Wednesday that what he described as a temporary bump was a “very small price to pay” for accomplishing the administration’s goals in Iran. Dilbert shrugged off concerns over spiking gas prices Thursday, saying “If they rise, they rise.” There’s the winning ad in the Blue Tsunami this November.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guards said on Thursday that they had hit a U.S. tanker in the northern part of the Gulf and the vessel was on fire. The Guards said in their statement carried by state media that, in time of war, passage through the Strait of Hormuz will be under the control of the Islamic Republic.

Sundowning Unca Fucknutz insisted Thursday he should be involved in picking the next leader of Iran. In an interview with Axios, Trump revealed he would not accept Mojtaba Khamenei, son of the former supreme leader. “They are wasting their time. Khamenei’s son is a lightweight. Khamenei’s son is unacceptable to me. We want someone that will bring harmony and peace to Iran. have to be involved in the appointment, like with Delcy [Rodriguez] in Venezuela.” When pressed about a new Iranian leader earlier this week, Trump was unable to come up with a name.

“Most of the people we had in mind are dead.” So, with that last statement, Trump reveals all his calls for the Iranian people to rise up are the same kind of bullshit he fed the Venezuelan opposition. The only “regime change” he wants is someone corrupt enough to do a deal with him to give him money. He really is just the local mob boss, running a shakedown racket.

Rumors rumors rumors - that’s what the fog of war runs on: latest rumor going around is that the reason the U.S. Army has canceled a big training exercise. “Officials confirmed the cancellation but did not provide a public explanation, fueling concerns that the decision is linked to the escalating conflict with Iran.” Add this in to Trump’s statement in an NBC interview yesterday that he “doesn’t believe” a ground invasion is necessary - “They’ve already lost everything.” All of Trump’s military adventures have in common that they run on ambiguity that lets him figure out what story to go with to show what a “winner” he is, and that’s what appears here. The U.S. Army and the Marines together are not big enough to take over a country the size of Iran. My wildass guess: boots on the ground raises the stakes too high for a gambler like Trump. At some point before that (but perhaps after massing troops for what appears to be a coming invasion) he will declare victory and drop it all.

Uh-oh: Influential Iraqi cleric Ayatollah Jawad Al Khalisi issued a fatwa this morning calling for jihad to be waged against the U.S. and Israel across the world, Iranian state media reported; this is a sign of how the conflict might blow back onto the streets of Western cities.

Trump said he is not concerned about the jump in U.S. gasoline prices, telling CNN that the spike will be temporary even as the national average climbs to its highest level of his presidency. “That’s all right. It’ll be a short term time. It’ll go way down very quickly,” he said, insisting he has “already figured out” the situation in the Strait of Hormuz, where tanker traffic has been effectively choked off by the conflict. Put this one in the “Covid will be gone by Easter” file. According to AAA, the national average for regular gasoline rose another seven cents Friday to $3.32 a gallon, surpassing the previous high of Trump’s two terms, set in April 2025 at $3.27. The price of eggs might have gotten him into office this time, but the price of gasoline will run him out of office.

International oil prices climbed to $90 a barrel Friday morning, a roughly 24% surge since the war began, as traders grow increasingly anxious about the near shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz, the world’s most critical energy chokepoint. Hello, $100/gal gasoline, which is thought to be the “breaking point” when it hits domestic consumers. Yeah, gas prices are going to be Dilbert’s second “Covid crisis.” Maybe Ivermectin can be melted and used to power SUVs and pick’m up trucks?? I remember all the moans I heard back in Maladministration I when the Yuppies were trying to fill the 80-gallon tanks on their Suburbans.

United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby said Friday that the cost of jet fuel has surged 58 percent since the start of the war, a jump he described as one of the most significant pressures now facing the industry. Fuel is typically the largest or second largest operating expense for major carriers, and the rapid rise is already reshaping financial forecasts across the sector. Kirby said the airline has been absorbing the increases so far, but warned that fares may soon rise if fuel prices remain elevated.

European leaders reaffirmed their commitment to diplomacy on Friday as the conflict involving Iran, the United States and Israel deepens, stressing that regional stability and Europe’s own security remain at stake. Leaders of the UK, France, Germany and Italy held talks the same day, agreeing that “intensive diplomacy and close military coordination” will be essential in the coming hours, according to a Downing Street readout. Officials across Europe have grown increasingly concerned that the conflict could spill over into a broader regional collapse.

Democratic Rep. Brendan Boyle, ranking member of the House Budget Committee, has sent a letter to the CBO requesting an estimate of the war’s cost, including its domestic economic impact. Congress is also expecting to receive a request from Maladministration II to cover the price of the conflict, on top of the roughly $1 trillion the Defense Department received last year. The department has not indicated the size of the request, but estimates are it will be around $50 billion.

The TrumpDOJ is seeking to empower Pam Bondi to suspend state bar ethics investigations into current and former DOJ lawyers, step outside attorneys quickly criticized as an illegal intervention into state-run processes. The proposed regulation, posted in the Federal Register Wednesday, would aim to halt state-level ethics proceedings against DOJ lawyers while the department conducts its own review, which would diminish local bar associations’ power. It comes as Bondi, members of her leadership team, and prosecutors involved in immigration matters face complaints probing DOJ misconduct in states where they’re licensed to practice law. The department unveiled the unexpected policy by saying the change is necessary in light of the “weaponization” of the bar complaint process. If finalized after a public comment period, “whenever a third party files a bar complaint alleging that a current or former Department attorney violated an ethics rule while engaging in that attorney’s duties for the Department, or whenever bar disciplinary authorities open an investigation into such allegations,” the attorney general “will have the right to review the complaint and the allegations in the first instance.”

Beauty pageant also-ran Lindsey Halligan, the ex-U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia who was hand-picked by President Trump to prosecute his political adversaries, is under investigation by Florida’s bar, a letter sent by the organization confirms. The letter was sent last month to the executive director of Campaign for Accountability, a watchdog group that filed complaints against Halligan in Florida and Virginia. Bar counsel Carlos Leon wrote in the Feb. 4 letter: “We are aware of these developments and have been monitoring them closely. We already have an investigation pending.” Another one bites the dest, believing to the end that Unca Fucknutz would take care of them.

Not a single refugee who isn’t a White South African Nazi has been legally resettled in the United States since October, according to the State Department’s most recent arrivals report. The report, published last month, shows that from the start of October 2025 and the end of January 2026, just 1,651 people were admitted under the US Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), which allows those fearing persecution based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or social group to apply for refuge in the United States. Aside from just three, every single one of them was from South Africa. Three Afghan refugees were also reported to have been settled in Colorado in November. But since then, their admission has been indefinitely suspended, and those who have entered may be at risk of deportation.

Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei said Thursday that the company would fight the Pentagon’s supply chain risk designation in court, while suggesting the “vast majority” of its customers would be unaffected. The Pentagon confirmed the designation, which SECDRUNK Kegstand announced last week, in a letter to the AI firm Wednesday, Amodei noted. “As we wrote on Friday, we do not believe this action is legally sound, and we see no choice but to challenge it in court,” the Anthropic CEO wrote in a statement Thursday night. The supply chain risk designation, which has typically been reserved for foreign adversaries, restricts defense contractors from using the company’s products. However, despite Hegseth’s initial comments, Anthropic has argued the restrictions cannot bar anyone who does business with the military from doing business with the AI firm. The company has argued for two restrictions on the military’s use of its technology: mass domestic surveillance and fully autonomous lethal weapons. The Defense Department, by contrast, has sought language that would allow it to use the firm’s AI tools for “all lawful purposes.”

[..]

Under pressure, the TrumpDOJ released more of the Epstein Files, including the three files relating to the woman who said Trump raped her at age 13. NPR reports 16 new pages covering the three additional interview summaries have now been added, along with a two-page intake form from the initial call to the FBI. 37 pages remain missing, including interview notes, a law-enforcement report, and license records. Chris Hayes noted last night that what is there is sufficient for a good investigative reporter to get at the real truth. Politically, the damage is already spreading beyond the underlying allegation. Reuters reported lawmakers were reviewing whether DOJ had improperly withheld materials; the handling of the release is now a broader oversight problem for Bondi and Blanche.

Wednesday, Maladministration II got told by the Court of International Trade to cought up the $130 billion they stole with the illegal tariffs. After the Supreme court decision that he couldn’t use IEEPA, he claimed he was going to impose a worldwide 15% tariff under Section 122 - which the TrumpDOJ argued in court last year was “not appropriate authority” and was why they were using IEEPA. Thursday, 20 Democratic state Attorneys General filed a lawsuit to stop these tariffs on grounds they are illegal. Here we go again. The standard Trump Response: keep arguing and fighting to the last ditch, and maybe further than that.

In Colorado, the state prosecutor, state attorney general, secretary of state, and a U.S. senator all reacted vehemently against Democratic Gov. Jared Polis’ signal that he will commute the sentence of election denier Tina Peters. Polis is just another spineless Run Up The White Flag Dim-o-crap.

For the first time in YouGov polling history, 50% of Americans support abolishing ICE. Even 23% of Republicans want ICE gone—another record. The regime built its entire brand on ICE, and now the American people are telling them no thanks.

“Neither let us be slandered from our duty by false accusations against us, nor frightened from it by menaces of destruction to the Government, nor of dungeons to ourselves. Let us have faith that right makes might; and in that faith, let us, to the end, dare to do our duty, as we understand it.” - Abraham Lincoln

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Latest polls provide an insight into a divided electorate

It often feels as though grassroots activists are pushing a boulder up an increasingly steep hill. The nearer we get to the top, the more difficult the incline. A recent Gallup poll has helped clarify that phenomenon for me.

The most recent Gallup poll shows that Trump is at his lowest favorability rating of his second term. See Gallup, Independents Drive Trump's Approval to 37% Second-Term Low (July 24, 2025).

The key finding of the poll is this:

“Trump’s rating has fallen 10 percentage points among U.S. adults since he began his second term in January, including a 17-point decline among independents, to 29%, matching his lowest rating with that group in either of his terms.”

And this chart illustrates the negative shift in voter sentiment for Trump:

Most of the media’s attention is being paid to the green line (US adults) and the dotted line (Independents), both of which show a steady decline in support for Trump since January 2025. The decline in support among Independents accounts for nearly all of Trump's overall decline among US Adults.

That overall trend validates the intuition of grassroots activists that there has been a significant downward shift in support for Trump in reaction to his policies, including immigration, tariffs, the reconciliation bill, DOGE cuts to science, medical research, climate protection, and green energy.

But two other lines deserve our attention: the red line (Republicans) and the blue line (Democrats). They indicate that there has been no significant change in support for Trump among Republicans and Democrats despite a tumultuous and chaotic six months filled with seismic shocks involving immigration, tariffs, the reconciliation bill, and DOGE cuts to science, medical research, climate protection, and green energy.

Although we should not over-interpret a single poll, this Gallup poll suggests that persuadable, swing voters are Independents, while Republicans and Democrats have firmly established viewpoints that are insensitive to major political developments. The Gallup poll indicates that we should concentrate our persuasion efforts on Independents—which may be the first key to winning in a closely divided electorate.

A second point follows from the intractability of the views of Republicans and Democrats. Given that views remain fixed regardless of political developments, increasing turnout among Democrats is the second (or first?) key to success in a closely divided electorate.

I recognize that the above two points are blazingly obvious. In fact, I can hear political consultants rolling their eyeballs to the back of their heads. But we have just experienced six months like no other in the history of our nation, and neither Democrats nor Republicans shifted their views of the president’s performance! That is (or should be viewed as) remarkable!

[Of course, there is very little room in the Democratic view of Trump's performance. Democrats rate Trump in the single digit in terms of favorability. Bouncing between 7% and 2% approval rating is background noise.]

One further note to put a finer point on the two obvious points I extracted from the Gallup poll. There are four major voting blocs in America. In increasing order of size, they are:

Republicans (32% of registered voters)

Democrats (33% of registered voters)

Independents (35% of registered voters)

Did not vote. (36% of eligible voters)

See Party affiliation and ideology of US registered voters | Pew Research Center and 2024 was a Landslide...for 'Did Not Vote' | Environmental Voter Project

Said differently, if “Did Not Vote” was a candidate in 2024, they would have garnered the most votes in the Electoral College by a wide margin! See the Environmental Voter Project article, linked above.

To recap: The most recent Gallup poll reinforces the point that our target audience for persuasion is Independents and our targets audiences for getting out the vote are (a) Democrats and (b) Did Not Vote.

I strongly believe that the unpopularity of the reconciliation bill will help Democrats to motivate “low propensity voters.” Issues that once seemed abstract are hitting home in a big way: Medicaid, healthcare premiums, student loan collections and availability, Medicare, job creation from green energy, availability of vaccines, and job security in government and education.

Polls are not votes, nor are they destiny. We must achieve the outcome we desire through hard work and persistence. But, we have a relative advantage at this moment; we must exploit that advantage for all it is worth!

[Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter]

[meltedbrains]

Bald/nuance/show answers

So tumblr's meme learning of statistics is pretty great; we've got spiders Georg outliers, gerrymandered polls, and potato Jeremys bias. But do you understand the inherent bias in asking a poll question?

Have you wondered who is asking the question and why? Potato Jeremys shows a clear bias on the part of the pollster; but the bias is so obvious it doesn't end up skewing the results. But the question itself can skew the results

If we had an incredibly popular poll asking which of monstera, prickly pear, peace lily, or geranium were the better house plant we might conclude that Tumblr has strong opinions on house plants, we might even be right.

But the assumption in these polls is that people care. House plants are great but most people don't think about them that much. Even if they take great care of their own and get a neighbour to water them while they're away they don't have a massive impact on their day to day lives. They don't affect store prices, or rent, or the weather.

It may seem obvious but the benefit of the 'bald' option allows us to see just how important the poll is to the wider community. Plant people may have very strong opinions on plants, doesn't mean everyone does. This is where you get 'political footballs' like gender neutral bathrooms. A vocal minority makes these issues seem more important to the general population than it actually is.

If a poll says people are unhappy with an issue ask yourself, were they unhappy before anyone asked? Did they care? Did they fall off neutral into unhappy after some gentle poking with a yes/no poll?

[trendynewsnow]

Final Week of the Presidential Campaign: Controversies and Messaging

As the final week of a closely contested presidential election unfolds, both campaigns are keenly focused on maintaining their core messages, enticing undecided voters, and minimizing any negative press. However, the last stretch has been overshadowed by controversies that have diverted attention from their intended final pitches. This week, the Trump campaign faced significant backlash stemming…

Final Week of the Presidential Campaign: Controversies and Messaging

[in-sightjournal]

Ask A Genius 1088: Male Voters and a Bullshit Article

Scott Douglas Jacobsen Article title: “Trump campaign projects confidence and looks to young male voters for an edge on Harris.” There’s been other research on whether this is conclusive.  Rick Rosner: Does this article cite any polling? Who is it from? Does it indicate anything substantial? Jacobsen: The article is by Jill Colvin and Michelle L. Price. It mentions that Trump’s campaign is…

Ask A Genius 1088: Male Voters and a Bullshit Article

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Mike Luckovich

* * * *

One more time with feeling . . . Ignore the polls!

November 6, 2023

ROBERT B. HUBBELL

    We are one year out from the 2024 general election, and media outlets are busy predicting a future they cannot know. I routinely advise readers to “ignore the polls,” so whenever I write about the polls, readers tell me I should follow my own advice. Fair point. But the poll by the New York Times released over the weekend prompted dozens of readers to send panicked emails asking me to “Talk them off the ledge.” The NYTimes poll will get more coverage in the Monday news cycle, so in anticipation of hundreds of additional panicked reactions, I will once again address the issue of polling. It is a scourge that we will live with for the next year, so occasional reminders that the only poll that matters will occur on November 5, 2024, is in order.

          In short, the NYTimes poll found that Biden is trailing Trump in five of six swing states and that Democrats are losing ground among young, Hispanic, and Black voters. Many voters believe that Trump is better able to manage the economy, that Biden is “too old,” and cannot identify anything that Biden did to improve their lives. Go figure!

          Nothing I write below should be interpreted as saying that polls do not contain valuable information. They can (depending on their quality). Polls include information that helps campaign managers and candidates focus and refine their message. They are NOT predictions. Remember Nate Silver’s article in FiveThirtyEight in 2011, “Is Obama toast? Handicapping the 2012 Election.” If polls taken one year before elections were meaningfully predictive, then each of the following candidates should have quit their first campaigns: Carter, Clinton, Obama, Biden—and Trump.  

          So, why should we not panic over the polls? Indeed, is there a silver lining? (Spoiler alert: Yes.)

          Let’s start with a lesson that we must not forget: The old paradigm of “horse-race” polls no longer applies. Why? Because such polls assume that two legitimate candidates are competing for votes within the system. We have never had a candidate who seeks to overthrow the system. Or who attempted a coup. Or who plans to invoke the Insurrection Act on the first day of his next term. Or who called for the execution of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Or who will use the DOJ to persecute his perceived enemies. Or who was found liable for sexual assault. Or who will support a nationwide ban on reproductive liberty. Or who views Putin as a friend and NATO allies as adversaries and leeches.

          I have not studied the NYTimes methodology, but I am confident it simply asks some variant of, “Which candidate do you support in 2024?” Faced with that limited construct, it is easy to be seduced into making a forced choice without regard to the fact that Trump is an anti-candidate. That error is compounded because the poll does not highlight Trump’s fundamental desire to destroy the system but instead asks about Biden’s age.

          As I have written before, believing that most voters will walk into the polling booth in 2024 and vote only for “Biden vs Trump” is simplistic—and beneath the NYTimes and its expert pollsters. When WaPo/ABC published a poll that was subjected to nearly universal derision for its flaws, I wrote the following:

          The 2024 presidential election features two candidates who are surrogates for different visions of America: Democracy versus autocracy; liberty versus tyranny; dignity versus bigotry; science versus disinformation; personal autonomy versus subservience to Christian nationalism; sustainability versus ecological disaster; safety versus gun violence; global stability versus confrontational isolationism. All of that—and much more—is on the ballot in 2024. The WaPo/ABC “horse-race” poll captures none of that.

          Three more points and then I will stop paying attention to the polls (as I recommend).

          First, Dan Pfeiffer’s article in The Message Box on Substack explains why the NYTimes poll shows the path forward. See Dan Pfeiffer, How to Respond to the Very Bad NYT Poll. If you are worried about the poll and want more details, I highly recommend Dan’s article. Pertinent passages include the following about “double haters” who dislike both Biden and Trump:

Perhaps the simplest explanation of Biden’s political challenges is that he has done a lot of good, popular things, and almost no one knows about them. Navigator tested a series of messages about Biden’s various accomplishments, including allowing Medicare to negotiate for lower drug costs, the bipartisan law to rebuild roads and bridges, and efforts to create more manufacturing jobs in the U.S. Guess what? All of this stuff is super popular. Medicare negotiating drug prices is supported by 77% of Americans, including 64% of Republicans. The bipartisan infrastructure law has the support of 73% of Americans and a majority of Republicans. Every accomplishment tested in this poll had majority support. It’s hard to overstate how impressive that is in a deeply divided, highly polarized country at a time when the President’s approval ratings are in the low 40s. That’s the good news. Here’s the bad news: according to the poll, a majority of Americans heard little or nothing about the accomplishments tested. There is a yawning knowledge gap. Now for more good news (think of this as a positive sandwich); the poll shows that when people are told about what Biden has done, his approval rating goes up. The voters most likely to move are the “Double Haters.”

          My penultimate point: The 2024 presidential election matters a lot. But so do congressional elections, gubernatorial elections, state legislative elections, municipal elections, and more. If—heaven forbid—Trump wins in 2024, a second Trump term with a Democratically controlled Congress is radically different than if Republicans control Congress. And states can be bulwarks of individual liberties if Republicans are able to pass national legislation. So, let’s not put every hope and aspiration into the presidential election. We should do everything we can to win up and down the ballot.

Concluding Thoughts.

          Although I did not intend to devote the entire newsletter to the NYTimes poll, I will stop here. We will be dealing with bad polls, handwringing, and negative press for the next year, so it is worth drawing a line in the sand and saying, “Enough!” The election is not over until it is over—notwithstanding the media’s best efforts to declare defeat a year in advance. And while I am criticizing the media, shame on the media for normalizing Trump as a legitimate political candidate. He is not.

          We will prevail over the long run, no matter what happens in 2024. (To be clear, I believe Biden will win re-election.) But if we have confidence that we will ultimately prevail, we can set aside the apocalyptic fears that we wrongly ascribe to a single election in 2024. We don’t need to panic over every poll.

The NYTimes poll reminds us that we have plenty of work to do in spreading the good news of Biden’s accomplishments. So, rather than needlessly fretting a year in advance about 2024, let’s recognize that we have a year to achieve

[Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter]