VA-Emerson- tie

[Matty]

https://mobile.twitter.com/EmersonPolling/status/1452726663041650698

[Skill and Chance]

Hmmm... I strongly expected a Youngkin lead from this pollster given the trend, but he stalled out at 48%.  Strangely, this could be McAuliffe's best non Dem affiliated poll in 2 weeks. 

[jamestroll]

I'm starting to wonder if a youngkin ayala herring victory is possible

[Schiff for Senate]

I'm starting to wonder if a youngkin ayala herring victory is possible

It isn't. Polls can be wrong. See 2016 and 2020 in WI, MI and PA (I know that the trio supported Biden by 2020, but I remember seeing a lot of polls in which Biden was leading in PA by 7-8 points...he ultimately won by just over 1 point). VA is too liberal to elect Youngkin; it supported Biden by double digits, so although I expect Youngkin to overperform Trump by a noticeable amount, McAuliffe will still ride the state's partisanship to victory. Youngkin ran a decent campaign but that's not enough in VA for a Republican in a statewide race at this point.

EDIT: Note that this is one of Youngkin's best polls out of dozens, and it's not like he's leading in it at all - it's a tie. Youngkin would need to outperform almost all polls to win, and I think he'll have a challenge crossing that last 5% or so. (I have McAuliffe winning by 7.2 points, actually.)

EDIT: I want to add that your own signature probably summarizes why the GOP can't win in VA anymore at all - the suburbs and urbs in NOVA and elsewhere have become Democratic strongholds and Youngkin is too associated with Trump to come near doing as well in them as he needs to in order to win.

[wbrocks67]

The problem for Youngkin is that this poll has him doing way better than he realistically will among Blacks (24%) and Latinos (47%) and yet he's still only tied.

Given that he will not be getting anywhere close to that support among those groups, I would clearly rather be McAuliffe.

[Person Man]

The problem for Youngkin is that this poll has him doing way better than he realistically will among Blacks (24%) and Latinos (47%) and yet he's still only tied.

Given that he will not be getting anywhere close to that support among those groups, I would clearly rather be McAuliffe.

Maybe the small sample size or maybe there's a lot of PoC's who are transracial.

[wbrocks67]

The problem for Youngkin is that this poll has him doing way better than he realistically will among Blacks (24%) and Latinos (47%) and yet he's still only tied.

Given that he will not be getting anywhere close to that support among those groups, I would clearly rather be McAuliffe.

Maybe the small sample size or maybe there's a lot of PoC's who are transracial.

Regardless of the sample size, if Youngkin can only come out at 48% when he's getting nearly 25% of Blacks and 50% of Latinos - that is not a realistic scenario where he's winning.

[Matty]

The problem for Youngkin is that this poll has him doing way better than he realistically will among Blacks (24%) and Latinos (47%) and yet he's still only tied.

Given that he will not be getting anywhere close to that support among those groups, I would clearly rather be McAuliffe.

Subsamples are never worth analyzing. The n is too small.
Maybe the small sample size or maybe there's a lot of PoC's who are transracial.

Regardless of the sample size, if Youngkin can only come out at 48% when he's getting nearly 25% of Blacks and 50% of Latinos - that is not a realistic scenario where he's winning.

[Person Man]

The problem for Youngkin is that this poll has him doing way better than he realistically will among Blacks (24%) and Latinos (47%) and yet he's still only tied.

Given that he will not be getting anywhere close to that support among those groups, I would clearly rather be McAuliffe.

Subsamples are never worth analyzing. The n is too small.
Maybe the small sample size or maybe there's a lot of PoC's who are transracial.

Regardless of the sample size, if Youngkin can only come out at 48% when he's getting nearly 25% of Blacks and 50% of Latinos - that is not a realistic scenario where he's winning.

On further inspection, it appears that Youngkin got at least 18% of the black vote and 40% of the Hispanics if you factor the numbers in the least favorable way to him.

[MT Treasurer]

Dismissing a poll by cherry-picking subsample findings when the topline is identical to that of the other most recent poll (Cygnal, 48-48) is very lazy.

This isn't the first time I've said this, but I beg y'all to stop treating results among subsamples like gospel.

[neostassenite31]

Biden+10 and D+4 sample with 57% bachelor's degree or higher. Biden's approval according to this is 41-52 (-10)

Also, Youngkin technically beat McAuliffe by two votes in this sample

[jamestroll]

Biden+10 and D+4 sample with 57% bachelor's degree or higher. Biden's approval according to this is 41-52 (-10)

Also, Youngkin technically beat McAuliffe by two votes in this sample

Yea so people need to get real and change their ratings on the race

[Person Man]

Biden+10 and D+4 sample with 57% bachelor's degree or higher. Biden's approval according to this is 41-52 (-10)

Also, Youngkin technically beat McAuliffe by two votes in this sample

With learners, McAuliffe was ahead by 10 respondents.

[neostassenite31]

Biden+10 and D+4 sample with 57% bachelor's degree or higher. Biden's approval according to this is 41-52 (-10)

Also, Youngkin technically beat McAuliffe by two votes in this sample

With learners, McAuliffe was ahead by 10 respondents.

Imagine if the actual election itself is also decided by such margins. It could get ugly quick

[Alben Barkley]

Fake news, T-Mac wins by mid-high single digits, pollsters finally decide it's time to commit seppuku.

[S019]

We still take Emerson seriously?

[Alben Barkley]

We still take Emerson seriously?

It's seriously questionable why we should take any polls at all seriously at this point.

[Buzz]

We still take Emerson seriously?

We don't take any polls seriously...

[ElectionsGuy]

We still take Emerson seriously?

We don't take any polls seriously...

Well yeah, now that they show Democrats in danger.

What's hilarious is that throughout 2020, they overestimated Democrats quite a bit on aveage but were still better than the "reputable" polls that were believed without one thought. But they continue to get laughed at as an unserious poll as if they overestimate Republicans constantly.

[wbrocks67]

We still take Emerson seriously?

We don't take any polls seriously...

Well yeah, now that they show Democrats in danger.

What's hilarious is that throughout 2020, they overestimated Democrats quite a bit on aveage but were still better than the "reputable" polls that were believed without one thought. But they continue to get laughed at as an unserious poll as if they overestimate Republicans constantly.

I think they get laughed at because they A) have very questionable methodology (MTurk, etc.) and B) they suddenly went from Newsom +2 to +20 in a matter of like 2 or 3 weeks this year.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

You'd expect wbrocks67 to learn his lessons from 2020. Instead, he's doubled down.


Regarding the poll's results, they are in line with other polling showing a race between Youngkin +1 to McAuliffe +5. We'll know soon, if they are right.

[ElectionsGuy]

We still take Emerson seriously?

We don't take any polls seriously...

Well yeah, now that they show Democrats in danger.

What's hilarious is that throughout 2020, they overestimated Democrats quite a bit on aveage but were still better than the "reputable" polls that were believed without one thought. But they continue to get laughed at as an unserious poll as if they overestimate Republicans constantly.

I think they get laughed at because they A) have very questionable methodology (MTurk, etc.) and B) they suddenly went from Newsom +2 to +20 in a matter of like 2 or 3 weeks this year.

So what you're saying is they accurately caught a large shift to the left in the electorate that many others saw too in the final weeks? And that makes them a joke? I would say that gives them integrity to publish such a different result. The California recall as a whole was a weird timing off-year election that really shouldn't be used to compare any other regularly scheduled elections. Remember Walker's recall? Did that predict anything for 2012?

And while so many people cite the methodology, not a single person can explain why they haven't had a worse track record than Quinnipiac, Siena, Monmouth, Ipsos, CNN, etc.

[wbrocks67]

You'd expect wbrocks67 to learn his lessons from 2020. Instead, he's doubled down.


Regarding the poll's results, they are in line with other polling showing a race between Youngkin +1 to McAuliffe +5. We'll know soon, if they are right.

And if they are wrong, most of you will do exactly what you did with the CA result - not admit that you were wrong and just move on.

If you honestly think that Youngkin will get 25% of the black vote and 50% of the Latino vote, then I don't know what to tell you.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

Which part in "one should't unskew small number demographic subsamples [strangely, only in polls you don't like]" you don't understand?

Also, stop strawmanning about CA.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

Emerson continuing its winning streak!