Tangle - The final polls of 2024

Episode Date: November 4, 2024

Over the weekend, several respected pollsters released their final surveys of the 2024 election, offering a snapshot of the presidential race in its last days. Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump have been locked in a close contest since Harris replaced President Joe Biden as the Democratic nominee, and the latest polls show the candidates remain neck and neck on the eve of Election Day. Ad-free podcasts are here!Many listeners have been asking for an ad-free version of this podcast that they could subscribe to — and we finally launched it. You can go to tanglemedia.supercast.com to sign up!You can read today's podcast⁠ ⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠, our “Under the Radar” story ⁠here and today’s “Have a nice day” story ⁠here⁠.Check out Episode 8 of our podcast series, The Undecideds. Please give us a 5-star rating and leave a comment!Take the survey: Who are you voting for in the 2024 presidential election? Let us know!You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Our podcast is written by Isaac Saul and edited and engineered by Dewey Thomas. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75. Our newsletter is edited by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, Will Kaback, Bailey Saul, Sean Brady, and produced in conjunction with Tangle’s social media manager Magdalena Bokowa, who also created our logo. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca.

From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, and welcome to the Tangle podcast, the place we get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking, and a little bit of my take. I'm your host, Isaac Saul, and on today's episode, we are going to be talking about the shocking poll out of Iowa. You know, we don't typically do sensational headlines around here at Tangle, but I mean, I don't really know another word to use to describe it. We're not just going to focus on the Iowa poll. We're also going to focus on some of the polling that has come out from across the political spectrum, some of the polling that has come out from across the nation in the last few days, because it is the final batch of polling

that we are going to get before election day. Before we jump into any of that, though, I have to do a massive thank you and shout out today before the podcast begins. Last week, we set a goal to drive 2,000 new subscriptions to our newsletter before election day. We've also been pushing the new premium ad-free podcast you can get by going to tanglemedia.supercast.com. And we shattered our goal. We obliterated our goal. And part of the reason why that happened was because NPR did a radio piece about our work, which nearly crashed our website and brought thousands of new readers and listeners to Tangle. So to those of you who discovered us through NPR over the weekend in This American Life, welcome. We are very glad to have you here.

For those of you who hate advertisements, please know that we have an ad-free podcast that we just recently launched. You can find it by going to tanglemedia.supercast.com and you can add it to your podcast listening platform. This also gets you some additional special content like Sunday podcasts and Friday podcasts and all sorts of fun stuff. So welcome to all of you. It has been a whirlwind week and a crazy couple

days, especially right before the election, but we're so glad to have you guys here. Also, I want to let you guys know that over the last few days, you've probably heard there have been allegations flying around about voter suppression and election interference in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. Some of these allegations have come from former President Donald Trump. Some of them have come from prominent people like Elon Musk. As longtime listeners and readers know, I am a Philadelphia based reporter. I grew up in Bucks County. It is a big part of my origin story and the genesis for Tangle. And I was watching all of these claims unfold. And so I did the thing I think reporters should do and people who want to spread reliable information should do. I got in my car and I drove out to Doylestown where the allegations have circled. And I sat down with the chair of the Bucks County Republican Committee. of the Bucks County Republican Committee.

Her perspective on what has happened up there might surprise you. Let's just say she doesn't think election interference and voter suppression are happening. We haven't a lot. So we have a brand new interview up with her on our YouTube channel, which you can find by looking us up, Tangle News on YouTube.

And I very much think it is worth your time. All right, with that, I am actually going to be driving the entire podcast today. John is here in Philadelphia with me, but I have totally and completely overwhelmed him with work, with videos and podcasts and new interviews to cut up and get out. So I'm gonna save him some time this morning

and do the full rundown of the podcast. Let's jump in. rundown of the podcast. Let's jump in. As always, we'll get started with some quick hits. First up, former President Donald Trump is holding rallies in North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Michigan on the final day before the election. Vice President Kamala Harris is scheduled to make four appearances in Pennsylvania. Number two, the unemployment rate was 4.1% in October, unchanged from the previous month, according to the latest job reports from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employment increased in healthcare and government while decreasing in manufacturing due to worker strikes. Number three, Federal Communications Commission Commissioner Brendan Carr suggested that Vice President Harris's appearance on Saturday

Night Live over the weekend violated the agency's equal time rule, which requires radio and television broadcast stations to offer comparable airtime for competing political candidates. Number four, the Pentagon announced the U.S. is sending additional troops to the Middle East in response to the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon. Separately, Israel said it captured a senior Hezbollah operative in an amphibious special forces raid in northern Lebanon. And number five, a federal jury convicted former Louisville police detective Brett Hankinson of using excessive force in the 2020 raid that resulted in Breonna Taylor's death, the first conviction of any Louisville officer involved in the raid.

All right, that is it for Quick Hits, which brings us to today's main topic. While the new shock results Iowa poll from pollster Ann Seltzer has been blowing up everybody's news feeds, and for good reason. It is just one poll, and we should put it in the context of what's going on more broadly in the polling, as we're getting into the final polling before Election Day, including the big new poll from NBC News today. The top line of that one is that it's a tie, 49 for Harris, 49 for Trump. So today's topic is the final polls of 2024. Over the weekend, several respected pollsters released their final surveys of the 2024 election, offering a snapshot of the presidential contenders' positions in the final days.

Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump have been locked in a close contest since Harris replaced Joe Biden as the Democratic nominee, and the latest polls show the candidates remain neck and neck on Election Day Eve. A Des Moines Register MediaCom Iowa poll conducted by Ann Selzer offered the most surprising result from the weekend. Selzer's poll showed Harris leading Trump 47 to 44 percent among likely voters, a shocking finding for a state that Trump won by 8% in 2020 and 10% in 2016. Seltzer's September poll had Trump ahead of Harris by 4 points, while her June poll showed Trump leading Biden by 18 points. Seltzer said that women, particularly those who are older or politically independent,

were responsible for the late shift toward Harris. Although Iowa is not considered a swing state, Seltzer is one of the most respected pollsters in the industry, with a reputation for accurately forecasting election results missed by other polling outfits. In 2020, for instance, her final Iowa poll showed Trump leading Biden by seven points, a significantly larger margin than the 538 polling average for the state. Her final 2016 poll showed Trump leading Hillary Clinton by seven points, also larger than the final polling average. Since 2012, Seltzer has forecasted not only the

eventual winner of the state's presidential, senate, and gubernatorial races, but also the winner's margin of victory within one to three points. But she's also been off the mark at several times in her career. Trump is still considered a heavy favorite to win Iowa, with other recent polls showing him with a commanding lead in her career. Trump is still considered a heavy favorite to win Iowa, with other recent polls showing him with a commanding lead in the state. However, if Seltzer's forecast is accurate in predicting a closer-than-expected outcome, it could augur a stronger performance for Harris and other Midwestern states than the current numbers show. Iowa's demographic profile is similar to Wisconsin and Michigan, and Seltzer's Iowa poll has accurately forecasted results in North Dakota, South Dakota, Michigan, and Wisconsin in the past five cycles. On Saturday,

the Trump campaign released a memo calling Seltzer's poll a clear outlier, pointing instead to a new Emerson College poll showing Trump ahead by 10 points. A Harris campaign official told Politico that the Des Moines Register poll's results mirrors the campaign's internal research that shows her gaining with women and seniors. Meanwhile, the final New York Times-Siena College poll shows Trump and Harris deadlocked in most swing states. The poll found Harris leading by three points in Nevada, two points in North Carolina and Wisconsin, and one point in Georgia. Meanwhile, Trump is up by four points in Arizona, and the candidates are tied in Pennsylvania and Michigan. Conversely, a new survey of likely voters from Atlas Intel found Trump leading Harris in every swing state.

Atlas Intel was the best-performing polling outfit in the 2020 presidential race, predicting every swing state's results within the margin of error. Today, we'll share perspectives from the right and the left about the latest poll, and then my take. We'll be right back after this quick break. The faster money and data move, the further your business can go to a seamless digital future for Canadians.

Let's go faster forward together. In life, interact. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+.

First up, we'll start with what the right is saying. The right feels confident in Trump's standing, suggesting his level of support isn't fully captured by the polls. Some consider the election a toss-up, but say polling results like Selzer's make no sense. Others say the polls hold little value in predicting the outcome of the race. In the Washington Examiner, Elizabeth Stauffer asked, Is the presidential race actually as close as current polls suggest? It's appropriate to describe the current presidential race as neck and neck, right? If polls are the only indicator you're looking at, that might be a fair statement. However, there are other ways to gauge where the candidates might stand with the electorate,

Stauffer said. Trump has momentum in this race, and it has come at the best time possible. He's riding high after a string of public relations wins. Trump's brief stint as a fry cook at a Pennsylvania McDonald's was a stroke of genius. His three-hour interview with top podcast host Joe Rogan was viewed by tens of millions of voters. He made liberal heads explode with his tour de force at Madison Square Garden last Sunday. Conversely, Harris has stumbled repeatedly. When her campaign's media-created momentum stalled in early October, she embarked upon a media blitz. Her performances ranged from lackluster to disastrous, Stauffer said. Further, the most important economic indicator of

all, the right-track-wrong-track poll, favors a Trump victory. According to CNN senior data reporter Henry Enten, there isn't a single time in which 28% of the American public thinks the country is going on the wrong track in which the incumbent party actually won. In red state, Banshee said, we need to talk about that Seltzer poll. I don't think Seltzer's final offering in Iowa is anywhere close to reality,

and there's empirical data to support that viewpoint. For example, the poll has Harris leading with seniors by 19 points. Trump won seniors there by 9 points in 2020. The idea that Trump has lost 28 points among seniors in a relatively red state just doesn't compute, Banchi wrote. The overall composition of the electorate in Selzer's poll would be Democrat plus 3. Again, this is a state that went Republican plus 8 in 2020. Nothing else in the crosstabs makes any sense either. How did we end up here? Did Ann Selzer release this poll to juice Harris given her long

history of being allied with figures like Hillary Clinton, Claire McCaskill, and J.B. Pritzker? I don't know, and I'm not going to go that far. It's possible she genuinely ended up with an outlier and had the guts to go ahead and release it anyway instead of massaging it like some other pollsters would have done, Banshee said. With all that said, I have no idea who's going to win this election. In fact, with just a couple of days left of voting, I'm more convinced than ever

that this is a pure toss-up race. What I'm sure of, though, is that this Seltzer poll is not close to what the real result will be in Iowa, and those using it to predict a Democratic landslide nationally are fooling themselves. In PJ Media, Matt Margolis wrote, Maybe just forget the polls.

As the election nears, the polls tell us that it's anyone's game, but seasoned observers and political instincts suggest otherwise. After a significant momentum surge for Donald Trump, the mainstream narrative is attempting to suggest that his lead has mysteriously evaporated, with Kamala Harris suddenly performing better in critical states. But for many who've followed these races for years, the reality might not be as close as polls are letting on, Margolis said. Before polling became the election season industry with an endless supply of polls to sift through, reporters once had to seize upon a candidate's standing by observing their rallies,

organization, and crowd energy. Perhaps the bigger picture is going to tell us a lot more about how this election is going to turn out. Are their polls blinding us to the bigger picture, especially when the broader indicators of enthusiasm and voter discontent weigh heavily against Kamala? Maybe, Margolis wrote. At a time when polling is less reliable because pollsters are either trying to influence voters or are too scared to make a prediction, perhaps it is time to just go old school. All right, that is it for what the right is saying, which brings us to what the left is saying. The left still views the race as neck and neck, despite recent polls in Harris's favor. Some say the Seltzer poll is ominous for Trump. Others argue polls have lost their value and have become a political tool for campaigns.

In the New York Times, Nate Cohn said the race is still a deadlock. Usually, the final polls point toward a relatively clear favorite, even if that candidate doesn't go on to win. This will not be one of those elections, Cohn wrote. While the overall poll result is largely unchanged since our previous wave of battleground polls, there were some notable shifts. Surprisingly, the long-standing gap between the Northern and Sunbelt battlegrounds narrowed considerably, with Ms. Harris faring better than before among young Black and Hispanic

voters, while Mr. Trump gained among white voters without a degree. The overall effect of these swings is somewhat contradictory. On average, Ms. Harris fared modestly better than our last round of surveys of the same states, but her gains were concentrated in states where she was previously struggling. Meanwhile, the so-called blue wall, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, does not look quite as formidable of an obstacle to Mr. Trump as it once did. As a result, Ms. Harris's position in the Electoral College isn't necessarily improved. In Talking Points Memo, Josh Marshall assessed the Seltzer poll. I think the Seltzer worship is a bit over the top, but she has a very good record. What makes this pretty hard to make

sense of is that if Harris is really positioned to win Iowa or even come close, that would suggest we've pretty dramatically underestimated Harris's electoral power. Like, really underestimated her electoral power. As you know, I've long believed there's a good chance that pollsters are doing just that. But this would be at a more dramatic level, Marshall wrote. Even for a pollster with a great record, it's just one poll. Polls can be off. It's also the case that Iowa is a state with a lot of white, college-educated voters. Democrats do pretty well with those voters right now.

It's also not that long since it was a swing state. Probably the best way to interpret this is to see it as a bit bad for Trump in directional terms and not get too hung up on the specific numbers. But even that may not really add up since the actual result is so hard to believe that I'm not sure it makes sense to pick and choose, accepting that it must be good news for Harris

in directional terms while dismissing the actual results as just not credible. One way or another, it's an ominous sign for Trump. How ominous? How important? I really don't know, but it's not good for him. In The Nation, Chris Lehman suggested no more polls. For all the election season lamentations over AI mischief, deepfakes, and dis- and misinformation, there's a central source of toxic data derangement hiding in plain sight. The erratically useful, wildly misleading, and ideologically disfigured polling industry, Lehman said. The way that hotly touted polling findings distort and disfigure our basic understanding of what's going on are teeth nationally familiar by now. Just over the past month, we've had news that the Rasmussen group,

the longstanding right-leaning polling operation, has been sharing advanced findings with the Trump campaign. In our own age of counter-majoritarian, blinkered negative polarization, polling increasingly functions to reinforce the narrative campaigns put forward about surging popular support and finely crafted appeals to undecided swing state voters. As the Rasmussen episode shows, some pollsters even appear to be distorting their own research, Lehman wrote. So here's Amada's proposal. Let's block poll findings out of the final stage of our presidential elections. In the hectic last lunge toward election day, the defects of polling become greatly magnified as voters are prone to use the alleged shifts in the mass electorate's mood as rationales for

casting ballots in a fog of empirically dubious pseudo-pragmatism. In the hectic last lunge toward election day, the defects of polling become greatly magnified as voters are prone to use the alleged shifts in the mass electorate's mood as rationales for casting ballots in a fog of empirically dubious pseudo-pragmatism, or else to refrain from voting at all. All right, that is it for what the left and the right are saying, which brings us to my take. The Tangle team is all assembled in Philadelphia for election week, and when the Iowa poll dropped, it immediately caused a ruckus. My first thought was, can I take my prediction back? I'm kidding. Mostly. You can

interpret Seltzer's polls in a few ways, but before I break those ways down, I want to counter a bit of nonsense that I'm seeing about it online. A few prominent talking heads have suggested the poll is a psyop or gaslighting or some other attempt to suppress the Republican vote. That read strikes me as very, very silly. For starters, Selzer isn't going to torture Sterling reputation in an attempt to play politics. She's been doing this a long time and is widely respected across the political spectrum. Let's not forget Trump was himself complimenting the quality of Selzer's polls just last year when they showed him with a big lead in Iowa. Second, I don't know a single Trump voter anywhere in the United States who would decide not to vote because of one poll in Iowa

showing Harris winning. It makes zero sense as some kind of suppression tactic or democratic plot. That being said, it's worth pausing here to make the case that we should take Seltzer seriously. In 2020, a lot of people thought Biden was going to blow Trump out, with some polls showing the candidates tied in Iowa. Then Seltzer released a poll showing Trump up by seven in the Hawkeye state, which gave the impression the national race would be much tighter. Biden ended up winning by a whisker across the swing states, largely vindicating her. Biden ended up winning by a whisker across the swing states, largely vindicating her. Here's what Seltzer's recent poll record looks like.

In 2022, her poll found Republicans plus 12 in the Senate. Republicans ended up plus 12 in the Senate. In 2020, she found Republicans plus 7 for president in Iowa. They ended up plus 8 in Iowa. In the 2020 Senate race, she found Republicans plus 4 in Iowa. They ended up plus 7 in Iowa. In 2018, she found Democrats plus 2 in Iowa. In the 2020 Senate race, she found Republicans plus four in Iowa. They ended up plus seven in Iowa. In 2018, she found Democrats plus two in Iowa. They ended up Republican plus three. In 2016, for president, she found Republicans plus seven. They ended up plus nine. In 2014, she found Republicans plus seven in the Senate. They ended up plus eight. In 2012, she found

Democrats plus five for president, and they ended up plus eight. In 2012, she found Democrats plus five for president and they ended up plus six. That's about as good as any pollster gets. Does she miss? Yes, she does. Would I bet against her? No, I would not. The most interesting aspect of this poll

is that it's out there at all. Sometimes when pollsters get an outlier like this, they might spike the poll. Seltzer hasn't. She clearly feels some level of confidence in her results, and she certainly understands that people are going to remember it and judge her accordingly. So here are those different ways of interpreting this poll that I mentioned at the start. Number one, Seltzer is, as she has in the past, outperforming her peers.

If this poll is close to accurate, Harris will win an electoral blowout and likely take all the battlegrounds with the possible exceptions of Arizona and Georgia. Remember, Iowa is important because it has a lot of white and white working class voters, which makes it a good barometer for other states like Wisconsin and Michigan, with some signals about the others thrown in too. Number two, Seltzer is off, but directionally correct.

Maybe Trump will win Iowa by four or five points instead of eight or nine, and Seltzer is capturing some late break toward Harris. Even in that situation, the blue wall is almost certainly a lock, securing Harris's road to the White House. Number three, the poll is a complete outlier. Sean Tran, the expert who runs Real Clear Politics, said about one in 20 polls will be flat out wrong, just legitimate outliers. Perhaps a well-respected pollster just happened to drop an outlier poll at an incredible time. Or, number

four, maybe, just maybe, the poll is both right and Trump could still be in a good position to win the swing states. I don't find this likely, but it is possible. Iowa is not being treated like a swing state this year, but maybe, given that neither candidate is spending much time there and the state isn't being blanketed in ads, it's just moving in a different way than the Midwest swing states. That outcome would obviously be something pollsters end up analyzing for years, but it doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility to me. If Seltzer is capturing some genuine break with the polling average, it obviously begs the question, what happened? One answer is that Republicans in Iowa passed a statewide six-week abortion ban, despite it being a relatively pro-choice state.

Another is what the New York Times poll also picked up on, which is late-breaking independents going toward Harris. We also have a lot of data that Harris is outperforming Trump among women and voters older than 65, offsetting any potential erosion in Black or Latino support. That, too, is consistent with the cross tabs in Seltzer's poll. Or perhaps it is what Nate Cohn, the chief pollster at the New York Times, said this week, that pollsters have been so concerned about underestimating Trump again that a lot of them have been spiking or underweighting polls that look really good for Democrats. We have some statistical evidence for that too. Nate Solver recently explained

how it is a statistical improbability that so many polls are showing a coin flip race, which is evidence of herding. Nate Solver recently explained how it is a statistical improbability that so many polls are showing a coin flip race, which is evidence of hurting. Pollsters all publishing neck and neck races to avoid being wrong. Or maybe it's the

exact opposite. Cohn wrote that some evidence indicates Trump's support could once again be undercounted. Cohn said this about the non-response rate in the New York Times final poll. Quote, across these final polls, white Democrats were 16% likelier to respond than white Republicans. That's a larger disparity than our earlier polls this year, and it's not much better than our final polls in 2020, even with the pandemic over. It raises the possibility that polls could underestimate Mr. Trump yet again. The truth is, once again, that all the early voting polls and late shifts can only tell us so much. Based on information I had two weeks ago, I predicted that Trump would win the election but lose Pennsylvania.

For me, predictions are a good way to test my hypotheses, and if I'm being totally honest, which I always promise to be, I think if I were making my prediction today with the benefit of the information we've gotten in the last two weeks, I'd probably pick Harris. But I'm also not feeling so moved to abandon my initial call. I still think Trump just has more paths to the presidency electorally, and so I'm hanging tight for the final 48 hours.

My expectation is a very tight race in all the battlegrounds, but one that could easily end up in an electoral college blowout if there is a polling error in one direction. We'll see. In the end, as is true in every presidential election, the only thing that matters is the actual vote. All right, that is it for my take,

which brings us to your questions answered. We'll be right back after this quick break. We'll be right back after this quick break. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu.

It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at FluCellVax.ca. Jennifer from Salt Lake City, Utah said, How much does the 24-hour news cycle and the late-night talk shows that do nothing but openly feed us their political bias affect the way people vote or how they feel about the candidates? So I think it matters a ton. Maybe this is my bias as the guy who has made media echo chambers his sworn enemy, but 24-hour news cycles, cable TV pundit shows,

late-night talk shows, radio talk shows, print media, digital media, social media, it all adds up, and it has an enormous impact on the way people think about politics, let alone the individual candidates themselves. It can happen very easily, but slowly over time. Maybe you hear someone on TV say that a candidate you don't know a lot about, yet are somewhat interested in, will be terrible on the economy. You hear that once and you can write it off as just someone's opinion. You see a news article mention offhand the issues that candidate has with voters on the economy. Then you see another. Then you go online and you see posts mocking that candidate's stance or snide comments talking about it, and over time it all adds up to just the

background assumption you have. I like candidate X, but I know they'll hurt the economy. But how do you know? At this point, you've never actually read their economic stances. You didn't read an article that convinced you, and you didn't have a good faith debate with someone that challenged your worldview. You only know it because the media you get exposed to on TV, on the radio, and print online, it all comes from sources you already know you like, who say things you already agree with. Over time, that shapes not only how you see political candidates, but politics in general and people who think differently from you and the whole world around you. It's one of the defining forces in the media

ecosystem and something that takes consistent daily effort to push against. I hope deeply that I'm helping provide a way for you to do that without requiring too much effort every day. All right, that is it for the reader question, which brings us to our under the radar section. Over 75 million Americans have voted early as of Sunday, roughly 48% of the total number who voted in 2020, 154.6 million. Some of the highest levels of early voter turnout are in swing states. In Georgia, more than 4 million have voted, nearly 80% of the state's 2020 total. North Carolina, 4.4 million have voted, also roughly 80 percent of 2020 turnout. Of those who have cast their ballots in states that report party registration

data, Democrats have voted at a slightly higher rate than Republicans, 37.9 percent to 36.2 percent. Overall, the high levels of early and mail-in voting suggest Americans increasingly prefer these methods after the COVID-19 pandemic prompted greater adoption of early voting in 2020. Axios has the story, and there's a link to it in today's episode description. All right, next up is our numbers section. Ann Seltzer's rank out of 282 in FiveThirtyEight's rating of pollsters is number 12. That's based on historical track record and methodological transparency. The New York Times-Siena College's rank in FiveThirtyEight's rating is number 1. Atlas Intel's rank in FiveThirtyEight's rating is number 22. Harris's lead over Trump among voters who made their voting decision in the last few days,

according to the latest New York Times-Siena poll, was 58% to 42%. The percentage of voters who say they remain undecided or persuadable is 11%. Harris's improvement with Black and Hispanic voters, respectively, since the last time Siena swing state polls, is plus 4% and plus 1%. The difference in likelihood to respond to the Times-Siena's final swing state polls among white Democrats compared to white Republicans was plus 16%. And finally, Trump's lead over Harris in Arizona and Nevada, respectively, was 6.5 and 5.5%, according to Atlas Intel's November 2024 poll. All right, that is it for today's numbers section. And as always, last but not least,

our have a nice day story. Access to polling places can be an impediment to voting. In 2021, a study from Boston University and Harvard University found that in 2018, 66% of registered voters with a car voted. However, only 36% of registered voters without a car did. To address this disparity, the ride-sharing app Lyft introduced the Lyft Up Voter Access program to provide free or discounted rides to polling places. In its decade of operation, this program has helped 3 million individuals vote, and the company aims to increase the number of individuals benefiting from it in 2024. Lyft announced this story recently, and there's a link

to it in today's episode description. All right, that is it for today's podcast. Don't forget to go check out our latest video on Tangle News. And remember that if you'd like ad-free podcasts, you can do that by going to tanglemedia.supercast.com. Don't forget to go vote, obviously, tomorrow. I very much encourage everybody to vote. And I don't care who you vote for. I just think you should participate. We'll be back tomorrow with our final podcast before the election. And I'll see you guys soon. Have a good one. Peace.

Our podcast is written by me, Isaac Saul, and edited and engineered by Dink Thomas. Our script is edited by Ari Weitzman, Will Kabak, Bailey Saul, and Sean Brady. The logo for our podcast was made by Magdalena Pikova, who is also our social media manager. The music for the podcast was produced by Darfum Tangle. Please go check out our website at readtangle.com. That's readtangle.com.