Once again, the American media landscape is littered with dissected reports from pollsters who got it wrong.
We can proudly say that JL Partners/DailyMail.com was not among them.
In yet another bad night for the public polling industry (with special mention to Ann Selzer, whose Iowa poll on the eve of the election was 17 points ahead), the Daily Mail’s figures stood out as the best in the country .
President-elect Donald Trump is now projected to win the popular vote; we were one of the only pollsters to make that claim.
When we released our final race forecast on the morning of Election Day, we were one of only two companies calling the race for Trump.
We were also the most optimistic about the former president’s chances, predicting a decisive victory, while the size of Trump’s margin of victory was underestimated by the likes of Nate Silver, The Economist and others.
How did we do it?
Our survey method focused on reaching potential voters who had typically been ignored in 2016 and 2020. These are low-engagement voters who may not have voted in recent elections and are unlikely to participate in opinion polls.
Once again, the American media landscape is littered with dissected reports from pollsters who got it wrong. We can proudly say that JL Partners/DailyMail.com was not among them.
While many of our techniques are proprietary, I can say that we combine traditional approaches (online and phone polling) with text message surveys and push notifications for smartphone apps.
These methods reached the voters who made the difference for Trump: men: white, black, Hispanic, Asian, non-college educated, and working class.
We also conducted in-depth, in-person, 90-minute discussions with individual voters in places like Georgia, Pennsylvania, and elsewhere.
These interviews gave us insights into voting behavior that others ignored.
Overreliance on outdated techniques, such as surveys conducted solely online and by telephone, led to oversampling of Democratic-leaning people, such as young professionals and older, white, liberal women.
By contrast, the Mail was able to identify three key dynamics in the race.
THE NEW ‘NON-WHITE’ VOTE
In our final Daily Mail poll, minority voters expressed skepticism about Trump, calling him “crude” and “disgusting” – not a particularly enthusiastic report.
However, an hour of conversation with these voters was revealing.
They didn’t like Harris either. And while they felt Trump was talking about their concerns about illegal immigration, the economy, and the uber-liberal elitism that undermines traditional family values, the vice president offered them nothing.
In our final Daily Mail poll, minority voters expressed skepticism about Trump, calling him “crude” and “disgusting” – not a particularly enthusiastic report. However, an hour of conversation with these voters was revealing.
A 31-year-old black woman in my last focus group in Detroit said Harris is “a wolf in sheep’s clothing.” A first-generation Asian American immigrant in Michigan explained her opposition to Harris this way: “I want to keep the country I came from.”
Exit polls now project that Trump won the support of every one in three nonwhite voters, the best result for a Republican candidate in decades.
Our final Daily Mail poll reflected that number exactly.
THE DOUBLE-EDGE GENDER GAP
Harris’ lead among women voters was a constant refrain from the mainstream media during this election cycle.
And indeed, the Mail’s latest national poll at the end of October found a significant gender gap: the vice president leads among women by 14 percentage points.
Then, days before Nov. 5, a poll by respected pollster Ann Selzer showed Harris leading Trump by three percentage points in Iowa, boosted by overwhelming support from women and especially women over 65. .
That would have been a surprising result in a reliably Republican state, and Selzer’s findings were seen as potential evidence of increased enthusiasm for the vice president.
But in all of our research, any push by female voters toward Harris would be neutralized by a strong preference for Trump among men.
The Mail’s latest national poll at the end of October found a significant gender gap: the vice president leads among women by 14 percentage points.
Our final Daily Mail poll showed Trump leading by 22 points among men, while Harris only led by 14 points among women.
Exit polls show a similar result. Women made up 53 percent of the electorate (and got 54/44 percent for Harris) compared to 47 percent of men (who got 54/44 for Trump).
And, surprisingly, Trump appears to have won among suburban white women by four points.
RURAL AMERICA ROARS
The third important pattern our model recognized was the strength of rural pro-Trump voters.
In general, the American countryside has low voter turnout, except in wave elections.
Farmers, factory workers, and people who work with their hands may not vote every presidential or midterm election cycle, but when they are encouraged to act, the power of their electorate can be immense.
The third important pattern our model recognized was the strength of rural pro-Trump voters. In general, the American countryside has low voter turnout, except in wave elections.
And our on-the-ground interviews revealed that enthusiasm for Trump was through the roof.
While other pollsters removed these low-propensity voters from their samples, we added them.
Our final nationwide survey included a high percentage of respondents who had not voted before (almost two in ten people in the sample came from this group).
These are the reasons why we saw changes that no one else saw. We find the underlying currents that others did not find. We make modeling decisions that others didn’t make.
By looking beyond the numbers and using novel approaches, we were able to find the nuanced factors of this choice and make the right decision.
James Johnson is Co-Founder of JL Partners and Callum Hunter is Senior Data Scientist at JL Partners
