At this stage in the Presidential race should start to show some herding towards what we’re seeing in the early vote. But NYT’s last poll suggests NYT was inconsistent in doing so.
This table attempts to compare how many people in NYT’s state-by-state samples said they had already voted, as compared to the demographics of those who’ve actually voted.
Given Ann Selzer’s surprise and the known herding we’re seeing from everyone else, I wanted to see how closely NYT’s sample matched current voting trends.
The first thing this shows is that only in PA is NYT’s sample close to capturing the current number of people who’ve already voted — but that’s likely because it was in the field later than other states (save Michigan), just from October 29 to November 2. By comparison, the Georgia and Nevada polling started on October 24 and Arizona started October 25 — all before Trump’s Madison Square Garden event.
Most of Georgians and North Carolinians have voted, but only half of those polled by NYT said they had.
In one state — Georgia — NYT had too few men who’ve already voted. That suggests their result, showing Harris winning by a point, may undercount Trump supporters.
But then there’s MI. To come up with their tied result, NYT first found too few women who had already voted, both in terms of the total who have voted, but also in terms of the mix. And then they said that the likely voter split would be 52-47, when it’ll probably be at least 53-47.
Nevada, which is one of the states I think Trump is most likely to win, is what puzzles me most of all. It’s has a near-even split on known gender, plus 11 percent where gender is not known (likely due to their automatic registration). From that, NYT comes up with a near-even split on its already-voted sample, as if those unknown voters split evenly. Its final Likely Voter model says more men will vote than women. That’s not going to happen. Even still, it shows Harris winning by 3.
Please let me know of any errors you catch, as I’m sure I’ve made a number.
Update: I’ve added a column showing the NYT’s 2020 exit poll on gender. It suggests NYT’s likely voter model for this year is significantly undercounting women in MI, NV, and NC (but could hypothetically be overcounting them in WI).
Legend
In this table, blue is male, pink is female, and grey is unknown.
Reported Early: The reported early gender split, from NBC.
% of 2020: The known total early vote compared to the total vote from 2020.
NYT already: The percentage of each gender in NYT’s sample who say they’ve already voted.
NYT LV: The gender split in NYT’s likely voter model.
NYT result: The topline results of NYT’s poll.
NYT 2020 exit: The gender split in NYT’s exit polls.
2020 total: The total votes cast in 2020.
Current EV: The total early votes cast, from Election Lab’s numbers.