Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

My Election Day was spent conducting surveys of voters in a mid-sized town in a swing state. I can’t reveal many details, of course, and it’s not a perfectly scientific poll. But it was probably at a location that represents about the most average American precinct, with an array of voters reflecting the nation’s demographics pretty well. And this is what I learned.

The voters treated me pretty well. Two years ago, at a more rural location, I got an earful from respondents. But Election Day, as we used to say in Texas “Nary was heard a discouraging word.” One guy filled out the survey and said “Trump 2024!” proudly, and not in an unfriendly manner, as if I was a fellow campaigner with him on his quest to elect his candidate.

In fact, lots of people filled out surveys. The poll workers inside marveled at my ability to get so many surveys. I doubt it was my charm and good looks. I think people wanted to say something, and not just vote.

There are a lot of myths about the Kamala Harris campaign, and that she was a bad candidate. That was pretty much dispelled when you looked at the data. Four years ago, many Biden votes were often voting against Trump in the wake of the disastrous pandemic. But incredibly, almost every Harris vote I came across was a “For Harris” vote. It was the same with Donald Trump. Almost every voter that went with the GOP was a “For Trump” vote rather than an anti-Harris vote.

Anyone thinking Biden would have been a better choice is probably watching CNN and John King saying Harris was running behind Biden in 2020. That’s not the Biden of 2024, despite the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 reducing inflation from more than eight percent at the time of that bill’s signing down to 2.4 percent. I know I wrote that changing nominees late doesn’t historically help the party in power, but it also presupposes Johnson might have defeated Nixon. For those thinking a woman shouldn’t be part of any future ticket, this wasn’t an anti-Harris vote.

In one surprising case, a young husband told his wife what to put on the survey, when it came to the political questions, and not just the demographic ones. I was too shocked to intervene.

The biggest lesson I learned was that despite my supposed amazing ability to convince people to let their voices be heard, nearly half of those accosted refused to be surveyed. Their demographics were all over the place. It is there that the mysteries of the 2024 election can be found…those dodging polls altogether, but still harboring strong views. I know we have been shifting between 52%-48% for the last several elections (only in 1996 have we seen any margin greater than eight percentage points since the end of the Cold War). Yet those who refuse to be surveyed yet vote are the ones that are probably shifting around so much that they enable Democratic victories in 2018, 2020 and 2022, but Republican victories in 2014, 2016 and 2024. 

Rather than go with partisan cues, it would be better for polling organizations to eschew party labels, candidates and even ideologies (several asked me to explain what liberal, moderate and conservative was, and I did the best I could without being partisan) on some surveys. These should be done on the issues themselves. In fact, more than one survey-taker claimed that the election itself seemed bereft of issues like education, the environment, health care, despite the best efforts of some. If media organizations want to learn the truth, that’s probably where they should good, and what they should focus their coverage, instead of devoting so much time to poll results, slight shifts, campaign strategy, and personality pieces of the candidates.