Bombshell earthquake. Tsunami. That is how the US political world is describing a staggering poll that came out over the weekend in Iowa, a red state. The survey for the Des Moines Register by respected pollster Ann Selzer, prompted this headline Iowa Poll Kamala Harris leapfrogs Donald Trump [00:00:17] to take lead near Election Day. Here's how a new Des Moines Register Mediacom Iowa poll shows Vice President Harris leading former President Trump, 47 to 44% among likely voters, just days before a high stakes election that appears deadlocked in key battleground states. The results follow September Iowa poll that showed Trump [00:00:33] with a four point lead over Harris, and a June Iowa poll showing him with an 18 point lead over Democrat President Joe Biden, who was the presumptive Democratic nominee at the time. Ann Selzer, who put together this poll, she then went on television a lot, and she explained the 4744 margin for Harris this way. [00:00:51] Digging into the data, we determined that it wasn't people switching positions. It was new people, Perhaps a bigger pool of people deciding to vote. And at that time, our definition of a likely voter was somebody who tells us [00:01:07] they will definitely vote. And the numbers were especially notable among older people, among women and among college graduates. These are all groups that are tilting toward Harris. So it seemed like there was a get off the bench moment. [00:01:25] A separate poll conducted by Emerson finds that Donald Trump is ahead in Iowa by ten. So what's the difference? While Ann Selzer said that Emerson and she kind of rained on Emerson in another media appearance. Emerson started with their assumptions and started with a model [00:01:42] about what the turnout would be for various demographic groups, including women and older voters, seltzer said. She, by contrast, surveyed that to come up with her model about what the demographics and the participation would be in the election. So women are breaking for Harris by double digits, according to seltzer. [00:02:01] And even if double digit is the lead that Donald Trump has with men in Iowa, because women are coming in as a much larger percentage of the electorate, 5,556%. That helps explain why Harris, according to seltzer, is winning Iowa State [00:02:16] that Donald Trump is supposed to win now. And seltzer survey has caused heartache and heartburn for MAGA world. Because, again, if women are turning in higher percentages for Harris and they're a higher percentage of the electorate than the pre-election polls, most of the polls are wrong. And according to the latest New York Times Siena poll, late deciders are coming [00:02:37] in 55% for Harris, 44% for Trump and the 8% of the electorate. This is what 8% of the electorate makes up the decision late. Again, they're breaking for Harris by you know you're looking at it 11 points. The polling comes as more than 70 million Americans have already voted, according [00:02:53] to the University of Florida Election Lab, roughly 40% of those surveyed by the Times Siena poll across the seven battleground states, said they had already voted. Harris wins those voters by a margin of eight percentage points, the polls found. Trump has an edge among voters who say they are highly likely to vote, [00:03:09] but have not yet cast a ballot. So the question is, will the voters who have yet to cast a ballot, will they be able to erase the margins for Trump that Harris has already accumulated? In other words, where more Trump voters show up on Election Day? And usually that's the case based on 2020 and also 2016, [00:03:27] is that early voters favor the Democrats. Late voters favor the Republicans. But will Donald Trump be able to run up his numbers in enough of these states on Election Day to make up what appears to be a Harris lead and some interesting information about early voting in North Carolina, for example, the election already has 59% voter participation before Election Day [00:03:48] in 2020, the overall participation in North Carolina was 72%. There was also something like 16 to 17% of the electorate that voted on Election day. So again, the question becomes what percentage is voting on Election Day? Does that number still withstand the Harris lead, [00:04:04] or is it something that turns the numbers back around towards Donald Trump? According to, a number of now back to the back to the Iowa poll because according to a number of strategists, it's more than just Iowa that is at stake. If in fact, Ann Selzer is correct, if she is correct and women are [00:04:21] a larger part of the electorate, and there's a greater percentage of older voters that are pulling for Harris than for Donald Trump, well, that could have an impact not just in Iowa, but in a lot of other states as well. And in fact, in Kansas, there's a poll that shows Donald Trump, who Donald Trump won Kansas by 14 points in 2020. He's only ahead of Kamala Harris by four. [00:04:42] So there is a suggestion here that perhaps Ann Selzer is on to something. And that has led to some remarkable pronouncements by some former Republican strategists, including Mark McKinnon on CNN. She's been the most reliable pollster that I've ever worked with in my career, [00:04:57] and I've worked with a lot of them. So it's just if directionally she's right and Trump just wins Iowa by a lot less than we thought he was going to. That just has huge consequences for the actual swing states. So again, I think if seltzer is half right about Iowa, I think Harris [00:05:13] could win all seven swing states. I'll just say it now. I know you're not in the prediction business, but I'm getting in it. Harris is going to blow the doors off, and it's going to be because of women and the Grand Gap. Because of women and the granny gap. And of course, it could apply not just to Iowa, but also to Wisconsin and Michigan [00:05:29] and other Midwestern battleground states. And by the way, I mentioned Kansas a moment ago. Kansas was one of those states that had an abortion ballot on that was essentially up for a referendum to try to further restrict abortion after the Supreme Court, Dobbs decision that was rejected by the voters, [00:05:44] they rejected the abortion restrictions. Abortion restrictions have been defeated in every state where they've been on the ballot, so even Republican states, women have come out and said, no, no, we're not going to have this. And they voted against it also, in special elections for the last two years since the Supreme Court. [00:05:59] Dobbs decision. Democrats have outperformed and congressional elections and special elections, and state and local elections that they were expected to lose or be close. They have outperformed the pre-election polling and the expectations, which suggests that women are a bigger part of this electorate than [00:06:15] they would have been had it not been for the Supreme Court decision two years ago. Now, there's one other thing to keep in mind in all of this we talk about under. We talk about overperforming compared to the polls, somebody else who has overperformed repeatedly in his elections, Donald Trump, he was expected to lose some of these battleground states to Joe Biden by [00:06:32] much greater margins than he actually did. And so the lingering question out there is, are there enough people out there who do not want to admit to pollsters and surveys that, yes, they're pulling the lever for Donald Trump? Will that number essentially mean that Donald Trump's expected final result [00:06:48] will be higher than the polls suggest? And we will soon find out. Jack. Okay, I've got even more information That's late breaking in a second for you guys. But first, let me begin to break this down. This election is not necessarily going to be the closest. There's been some unbelievably close elections. [00:07:04] Obviously, 2000 Bush v Gore separated by a couple hundred votes in Florida and then 43,000 votes in the three swing states in the last election made the difference. So I don't know that this is going to be the closest. In fact, at the end of the day, as David's pointing out, [00:07:20] it might not even be that close, especially in the Electoral College. But what it is is the most unpredictable election of my lifetime. It's for the two reasons that David explained there. So in 2016 and 2020, Donald Trump got all of these unexpected voters. [00:07:39] And even in the states that Joe Biden won Michigan and Wisconsin, for example, he had around an eight point lead and barely wound up winning them by about 0.6. So tons of unexpected voters came in for Donald Trump. And I've explained that phenomenon for the last eight years. [00:07:57] No one in mainstream media wants to hear it, and they still don't understand it. It's people who don't normally vote going, oh, there's someone that's against the system. Well, I hate the system. I'm going to show up and vote for that guy. Now I think, of course, Donald Trump is a fake populist. You've heard me say that a million times, but that is what's driving that. [00:08:14] On the other hand, in 2022 and 23, a ton of unexpected women voters showed up and the Democrats did better than expected, which hadn't happened in a long time. So what we're in is a is a battle of unexpected voters. [00:08:30] Which side is going to have more unexpected voters? So when we look at that, well, a couple of data points that David just shared with you stick out to me as the most relevant. The late deciders breaking 11% in favor of Kamala Harris is a big deal, [00:08:49] because now we're no longer talking about polling and the assumptions that those different pollsters make when it comes to their polling. Now we're talking about actual votes, right? And if she's winning by 11% in people who actually voted already, [00:09:06] well, that's a big deal. And especially because the in that category, they hadn't made up their mind until very recently. So they're breaking towards her. We're not talking about the people who are already on the two different sides. So score one for her on that. And then to me, North Carolina was really interesting because Kamala Harris's team [00:09:26] pulled out a lot of their ads from North Carolina around a week ago, even less. And that seemed to be signaling surrender there as that they had lost and the polling was trending towards Donald Trump in North Carolina. It looked like he was going to put it away. [00:09:42] But now over 50% of the vote is already in. And, you know, on election nights, we'll tell you, as the percentage of the vote gets higher, it becomes so much harder for the other side to overcome a lead, because let's say it's 50% of the vote is in and Kamala Harris is up by eight, [00:10:01] which is actually the situation in North Carolina, we believe so far, based on the information that we have, it's not at all definitive, guys. So if if that's true, then Donald Trump would have to win the other 50% by more [00:10:18] than eight points to to bring it back to a tie and then to be able to take the lead. Right. So that's a lot of votes to make up. And and so I think that if those numbers are true, [00:10:35] that's super hard for him to make up. On the other hand, here's a new data point. Jon Ralston is the most respected reporter in in Vegas. He's been covering these elections for a long time. He's been right about a lot of the election results. He kept talking about rural voters coming in at much larger numbers [00:10:53] than they normally do in Nevada elections, and that was leaning towards Trump. So he was giving signals throughout that Nevada was headed towards Trump. But here at the last day, he turned around and said no, based on what he's [00:11:08] seeing recently and his intuition and all the other things that go into it, he believes that Kamala Harris is going to pull out Nevada barely by like 0.3% or so. So the two most important demographic groups are both women. [00:11:25] It's just two different kinds of women. So one is independent women that are now coming in in that seltzer poll in Iowa at 2 to 1 margin for Kamala Harris. Remember, this is not Democratic women. This is independent women. And now independents outnumber Republicans and Democrats in the country. [00:11:44] So which way independents break is super relevant. The late deciders go to Kamala Harris. Independent women go to Kamala Harris in giant numbers. And then the last one is potentially the most important senior women. So that is why Kaitlan Collins on CNN reporting that those Iowa numbers came [00:12:01] in like a gut punch to the Trump team, because if they're losing senior white women in the numbers, that they're losing them in Iowa. If that poll is accurate. Oh, boy. Then they're in a lot of trouble. And they are they're bleeding out senior voters in ways that people didn't expect. [00:12:18] Meanwhile, this is again, this election is so topsy turvy. We're in the middle of a transition. The parties are transitioning. Transitioning. The voters are transitioning. So Trump is picking up a lot more younger voters who are frustrated with the Democratic Party and Kamala Harris and the inability of Democrats [00:12:35] to ever get anything done. On the other hand, the Democrats are picking up a lot of senior voters who are worried about Donald Trump's instability and his attacks on the Constitution and democracy. So at the end of all of that with now less than a day to go. [00:12:53] I'm at, I don't know, and I think that everybody should be at I don't know, I think both sides are overconfident. Those unexpected voters from Trump can still show up, just like they did in the last two presidential elections. And those unexpected women voters are already showing up. [00:13:10] And the question is, to what degree does that cavalry arrive? Is it a normal size election, a little bit more than normal, or do they show up in giant numbers? I'm so glad you mentioned younger voters, because one of the things that Ann Selzer pointed out is that the share of the Iowa electorate, when you [00:13:26] look at older voters and younger voters, was much more sort of weighted, she found, towards older voters, people over 65 were turning out in a greater participation than a lot of people had thought. And people who are younger voters, 25 and younger, were turning out a much less [00:13:42] number than a lot of people had thought. And if you go through some of the pre-election polls that have been done over the last couple of weeks, especially, so there's that in Iowa, if you go over the pre-election polls, especially some of the Republican paid for polls that are out there, that, in my view, are not scientific or statistically significant in the least, [00:13:57] but a lot of them used a model that suggested, okay, we'll take the number from 2020 that will have women will be something like 53, 54% of the electorate. Okay, that's fine, except that in some of these battleground states North Carolina, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, Wisconsin, [00:14:13] not so much, but Michigan, you're looking at numbers of 55, 56% women in terms of the overall makeup of the election. And so when you have that 1 to 2 percentage point difference in terms of the overall participation, and you have a larger pool of women, and you already have women who are voting for Harris over Trump, [00:14:31] as you said, you know, by 15 to 20 points. That's where the difference becomes. And that is there's not enough male voters, even if they're supporting Donald Trump in the same way that women are supporting Kamala Harris, there's just not enough men to make up that gap. And then likewise, you add to the mix, if people over 65 are breaking for Harris [00:14:49] in the way that they're breaking in Iowa, and you don't have the the younger turnout that a lot of these pre-election polls suggested, then that means these pre-election polls were wrong. And I think the other piece about it is we know there are some of these pre-election polls that were done by Republicans that were part of a strategy [00:15:05] by the Trump campaign to be able to say, look, the election was stolen if I lost, because look at the pre-election polls, I was winning. I was winning all these states. There's no way I could have lost unless the Democrats stole it. And I think there are some organizations, some fly by night organizations that decided to participate in this [00:15:22] and to essentially cook the books to try to help Donald Trump and perhaps give more enthusiasm to Republicans and depressed Democrats. But that also fed into the narrative because the mainstream news organizations that did essentially a polling average, they included all the numbers. They included every poll in terms of their, you know, [00:15:39] real clear Politics average of the polling for the states and nationally. And so it had the effect of some of these Trump favoring polls, tightening the race and making it seem much closer than it might otherwise have been. So I think to your point, it's sort of a chaos election. Nobody really knows. [00:15:54] But at least in terms of likely voters, who's showing up, the numbers are not matching what some of these pre-election polls had been counting on. And I think that's why you're seeing so much enthusiasm for Kamala Harris and a sense of dread developing in the Trump campaign. Yeah. So tomorrow our election coverage starts at noon eastern. [00:16:12] Don't miss a minute of it. It's going to be amazing. Dave is going to be part of Michael Shaw and Kasparian. ET cetera. And we're going to focus right at twitter.com. And at twitter.com will also have all of the election news, all the exit polls, [00:16:29] all the, you know, hubbub around the long lines, the Republicans claiming fraud. ET cetera. But I want to end on a couple of important things here. So to David's point about the some of the nonsense polls in there, Real Clear Politics is a place that a lot of people go, but they [00:16:46] included two nonsense Republican polls, at a minimum, maybe three. And so that skews their average, and that skews the way the people are looking at it. I try to ignore those as much as possible, but still, at this late date, the very last polls that came in, most of them have Kamala Harris [00:17:05] winning the election overall. But New York Times, Siena. And there now there there's two buts there. One is they're all over the place. Some have her holding the blue wall. Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and others. [00:17:21] But losing Nevada and Arizona, North Carolina, Georgia. Others have her winning, Wisconsin and and Michigan and Arizona and North Carolina, but not Pennsylvania. So and they're just they're all over the place. [00:17:36] Every poll has different states going, different people. Kamala Harris is winning. Almost all of them that are not like weirdo, jerry rigged Republican Polls, but New York Times Siena poll comes in at the end. She wins overall, but she's tied in Pennsylvania and Michigan. [00:17:54] Well, if she doesn't win Pennsylvania and Michigan, she's not going to win. So that leaves us at. It is near impossible to tell. One last thing. The national average has them close. See, that doesn't make any sense either, because if you're close nationally, [00:18:10] then the Republican candidate is much, much, much more likely to win. But yet when you look at the swing states, they're not matching any of the old patterns. And what ultimately decides that is state by state. So the swing states will make all the difference. So that leaves Nate Silver, Frank Luntz, Harry Enten, and myself, [00:18:30] for whatever it's worth, all that. I don't know, and neither does anyone else. Okay. The people who are usually the most certain are the least certain in this election. But David, it seemed like you might be more certain. Well, I'll give you one thing I am certain about. [00:18:48] And then I'm curious about your opinion. Renata on Twitch. One of our members there wrote in woman might save you all. Well, that's definitely true, because if Kamala Harris wins, it will definitely be be because the cavalry arrived and that cavalry is female voters [00:19:05] in larger numbers than expected. So that part is clear. But we don't know that that's definitely going to happen. Or maybe the Trump voters overwhelm. ET cetera. So if she wins is because of women voters, but I don't know at this late date whether she's going to win. David, you sounded more confident before we came on air. [00:19:23] - What's your take? - Yeah, I'm going to go on. I don't think it's so much of a limb because, look, I make this decision in part based on what I've seen in some of the cross tabs and some of the percentages of people who have already voted. The way the numbers are coming in. I do think that women as a percentage of this electorate, it's coming in higher [00:19:40] by a percentage point or two than nearly all the pre-election polls. So that favors Kamala Harris. The other part is, if you look back at the last two years, every single election, Democrats have outperformed the pre-election polling. Ballot initiatives. Special elections. [00:19:55] Mayoral races. There was a race in Anchorage, Alaska, Republican town, that Donald Trump carried by 14 points this year. The Democrat won by 12. I mean, there's just there just feels like there is this wave of participants that have not previously been counted as likely voters. So my sense and, you know, maybe it's going out on a limb, [00:20:13] maybe it's overconfidence, maybe it's partly wishful thinking. But my gut tells me that that the polling is wrong, that there's a greater participation of women than anybody had anticipated, that younger voters are not going to turn out for Donald Trump in the way they had been counting on, and that, yes, senior voters are breaking harder for Trump. [00:20:29] But remember, you know, in the course of four years, you get a cohort of 5 or 6 million senior voters who are not voting anymore because they're dead or they're incapacitated. So there's a group that, you know, essentially reshuffles in terms of the older cohort. So to put it bluntly, I think she is going to win six [00:20:45] of the seven battleground states. I think some of them will be very close. Nevada and Arizona, very tight. I think North Carolina and Georgia could be tight. Pennsylvania could be tight. But I think you'll have a couple of them that she'll win by, you know, 50 or 60,000 votes. And I'm pretty confident and I know this may be an outlier. [00:21:02] I think that by midnight eastern time on election night, we're going to know that Kamala Harris has won this election. And the only thing that's left is certification and making sure that the ballots are official. But I just think that they're going to be so many states that she's going to win battleground states that it's going to be over on election night. [00:21:17] That's where I feel it's going. Okay. Strong statement, I like it. At noon eastern tomorrow on Election day when we start our coverage on tight. Com I will be forced to make a prediction and I will. And we're going to ask you guys, our viewers, to make predictions. [00:21:34] And whoever is the most accurate will be declared the election champion of the world. Now. What does that mean? Nothing outside of you being election champion of the world. But you get to brag about it for the rest of the time that you [00:21:49] were the one person who knew best. So that's what we're going to try to determine. And I'm going to add some fun if I'm wrong, if she does not win six of seven battleground states, suppose she only wins 2 or 3 and it's tight, or she loses the election. I will come back on Twit, and I will literally eat this paper [00:22:06] that I've written some of my data on. I will eat it on live TV. I will humiliate myself. I will shame myself, I will apologize, I will say, never believe Schuster again. He's wrong. He's admitted he's an idiot. He's a moron. But I don't think that's going to happen. I think she's going to win and it's going to be a blowout. [00:22:22] I like how strong David's coming in. It's usually my move and like in this case, I'm not at all sure. But David seems very sure. I'm so curious to see if that's going to turn out to be true. I can't wait, so I hope we see you all on Election Day and and see [00:22:40] how it actually turns out. So I was recently talking about how trust in media is severely declining. A lot of you guys are just as skeptical of mainstream news as I am. This doesn't come as a surprise, considering an MSNBC producer admitted the network is doing all it can to help Kamala Harris win, [00:22:56] prioritizing Democratic Party interests over objective coverage that doesn't help anybody. So let's dive into this story with the help of Ground News, to add transparency to a very biased news landscape. Now they're an independent, nonpartisan app and website we're working with [00:23:12] because they're designed to expose hidden agendas influencing the news you consume, like which way an outlet politically leans, and who's funding them. That's very important. They even created an entire news feed called The Blind Spot, dedicated to surfacing important stories that are left out of the right or left media bubble, [00:23:29] like the one an MSNBC producer claimed the network intentionally aligns their daily message with Kamala Harris. Ground news found just over 20 sources reporting on it, with almost zero coverage coming from the left. I can also see who owns those outlets, and none are from media conglomerates. [00:23:46] Nearly every headline listed there is from independent news sources outside the mainstream media bubble. But that's what makes ground news so great. It's really easy to diversify how you stay informed on the platform and find their original reporting, like the tweet posting the undercover [00:24:01] video of the producer admitting it. All outlets across the political spectrum are guilty of selective reporting influenced by corporate agendas, making what Ground News is doing not only revolutionary, but crucial. Right now, they are fixing what's been broken in the news landscape for a long time by giving us the tools to think critically based on all the facts. [00:24:20] So go to ground. That's g r o u n d dot news slash t y t to try it out for yourself. Our viewers are getting a massive 50% off their top tier vantage plan. You can use it to help with your research and stay accurately informed on the most [00:24:35] pressing issues we discuss every day. Find the link in the description box below the video.