If you are a political junkie – and if you read it, the chances are qualifying – you know the interviewer and a survey to which the header relates. A few days before the election, Ann Selzer released her last 2024 Register monks Iowans, which allegedly showed that Kamala Harris leads Donald Trump in a state where he wore comfortably twice. The result is detonated as a bomb in political circles. When one line of thinking went, If Selzer is right, as always, it means that Iowa is at least in the game, which would also mean that the states of the “blue wall” in the upper central west probably disappeared for Trump. By the way, she wasn’t always right, but she didn’t feel a sturdy reputation. I wrote an analysis of the survey, sharing deep skepticism from sources at the highest level of Iowa policy. One of the points I found was that if Iowa was seriously on the board of Democrats in 2024, why did the same effect appear in the Ohio survey?
As you can probably gather from this fragment (here is the whole piece), I was quite doubtful that she was on the pitch. When the actual election results appeared, they represented a catastrophic defeat for Selzer. Trump scored Ohio by over 11 points, expanding its previous two margins – and Iowa followed in their footsteps. Trump wore Hawkeye’s state over 13 points, much more dominant than his previous shows. He also jumped three key states of the “blue wall” on the way to conveniently winning the presidency. Selzer’s survey of Buzzwort turned out to be breathtaking; AND 16-point miss. The only real remaining discussion was whether the defeat would be credibility harmfulor credibility killing For her. The answer to this question could be reduced to the result It’s an investigation:
Gannett, the publishing network, which is the owner of the des Moines register, has began investigating the apparent leak of Ann Selzer survey in IowaTwo people who know this case confirmed the semaphore. Selzer Iowa survey It was publicly published by Des Moines Register/MediaCom in the evening of November 2, creating nationwide messages and giving democrats, which would turn out to be false hope, showing that Kamala Harris leading Donald Trump by three points in this state. (Trump finally won 13 points.) But about 45 minutes before public release from the survey, stray tweet He predicted the findings of the survey. Its author he said thaGovernor Illinois JB Pritzker, a graduate of Duke University, mentioned what was not published during the Duke Democrats meeting that day. (Pritzker spokesman did not answer the question of apparent leakage.) …Gannett is investigating how Pritzker and probably other political actors could find out about the survey earlyAnd the e -mailes of employees gave one of the sources.
I heard unconfirmed rumors that the previous Selzer survey in the series (after Biden Dropout), which showed Harris at Trump’s striking distance, ended in the hands of democrats before his release. The set of October data has certainly leaked to democrats early, not just a few minutes. Before the publication, whispers of the day or two swirled. Some older democrats had it early. Ethical fears a lot. If Selzer’s surgery or Selzer herself underwent electrifying results for other partisans, this is a scandal in itself. Given the dramatic nature of these results and the way they were formulated as transforming the expectations of the entire presidential race by many in the media, the scandal may be wider. He was a survey of a humiliating error or maybe it was designed (or at least not preventively rejected as a problematic She did earlier) be a narrative shapeAnd not as a reflection of reality? Regardless of how this crater survey or how the inexact crater circulated among democrats before its release, it seems that Selzer It will not be nearby Lift the weight of what the Gannett probe can discover. She came out:
Pollister Ann Selzer finishes the election survey, moving “to other projects and possibilities” https://t.co/z7c7islfa8 By @Dmregister
– Mike Emanuel 🇺🇸 (@MikeMeMeMeemulfox) November 17, 2024
I knew a few years ago Part of the election in my career was approaching the end. Over a year ago I informed a register that I would not renew when my contract for 2024 expired with the latest election survey, switching to other projects and possibilities. Would I like to issue this advertisement after the final survey adapted to the results on the day of the election? Of course. It’s ironic that it is quite the opposite… over 30 years of surveys led to A+ evaluation NATE Silver analysis regarding the achievements of interviewers regarding accuracy. I won this rating on the first Silver list and My rating has never dropped. Maybe this accuracy story made the protruding position too comfortable. The probe is a science of estimation, and learning has a manner of the scientist’s periodic humiliation. So I’m humiliated, but always willing to learn from unexpected discoveries …My honesty means a lot to me. For those who interrogated this, there are probably no words that could be discouraged.For those who know me best, I appreciate the supporting notes and connections that remind me that what attracted me as friends, colleagues and clients was involved in truth and accuracy …
He claims that she decided to leave the election surveys over a year ago and informed Register that it would be the last cycle of their partnership. Paper printed this claim from her, which I doubt they would do if she put it to save her face. Regardless, he goes out on a definitely low note after qualifying her last survey in a possible way. She should be proud of her achievements leading to this catastrophe, but “A+” the assessment he complains about will undoubtedly accept a stern hit, and this outstanding “F” has been averaged. with this self -modewho illustrates how much the latter survey failed, not only at the presidential level:
She did it@Millermeeks destroyed the false “Iowa survey” by Ann Selzer #IA01and posed for her own photo “Dewey defeating Truman”
Selzer’s survey predicted that Miller-Meeks would lose sixteen percent; Won pic.twitter.com/rvqvj923o8
– Matthew Foldi (@matthewfoldi) November 7, 2024
Republican US representative Mariannette Miller-Meeks face to face For the second time in three campaign cycles after the democratic pretender Christina Bohannan asked for a conversion in the 1st Congress District race in the south -eastern Iowa. This is one of the four Iowa races that set off for universal elections in 2024. Miller-Meeks won the nickname “landslide” for her victory, only six votes in 2020 after surviving with Democrat Rita Hart. But the GOP income is certain with a much larger basis of about 800 votes that the results will have.
The Miller-Meeks won literally six votes in 2020. This time its advantage is about 800, which will most likely return it to the congress after this conversion. Another Whopper Miss. Selzer coped with this fiasco Publicly suggesting It is possible that the release of its number could motivate Republicans to the occasion in a larger number. Maybe Maybe Take into account the shift of a point or two, but not 16 points, to divine love. In my opinion, this is great, delusional thinking. Perhaps Selzer made the correct choice to move on.
