This time, can we believe the polls?

In mid-October of 1948, an election year, The New York Times was reporting Republican Tom Dewey’s likely cabinet choices after his all but certain victory over President Harry Truman in November.

But it turned out Dewey’s Secretary of State John Foster Dulles would have to wait until President-elect Eisenhower picked him four years after the Times gave him the job on that October Sunday in ’48.

This month, I’ve been reading about the likely Biden Cabinet choices while examining  the similarity between Biden’s lead in the polls and President Hillary Clinton’s lead  in 2016.

So what’s a writer to do when he feels the need to deal with the coming election and not some easier topic on the Thursday before  Nov. 3? Believe the polls or remember 2016 and 1948?

This writer is assuming the pollsters have learned a few things since their “slight error” in the 2016 debacle and taking the word of the FiveThirtyEight founder Nate Silver that the nation’s pollsters truly did learn from their mistakes and we should trust the polls this year.  

It is therefore worth noting that Silver’s simulation of 40,000 election outcomes concludes Biden has an 87 percent chance of winning to Trump’s 12 percent as of two weeks before Election Day. (It is also appropriate to recall Gallup and the other major polls stopped polling two weeks before the 1948 election in the belief Dewey’s lead over the incumbent president was insurmountable. Silver and the others will keep polling until election eve.)

And it is also worth examining where this year’s stupendous Biden margin is coming from. First and foremost, it’s coming out of the Grand Canyon of gender gaps.

Women don’t like the incumbent.  The latest Washington Post/ABC News poll indicates  what has been called a wholesale repudiation of Trump by women. This is especially true of the suburban women he’s been courting by promising to keep federal low-cost housing projects out of their neighborhoods. According to the Post/ABC figures, Biden leads the president among likely female voters by 23 percentage points, 59 percent to 36 percent. Male voters are evenly split, 48 percent apiece.

I can hear Trump devotees saying, “What do you expect from a poll run by the liberal Washington Post?”

Fair enough, so let’s examine the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll on the wholly incorrect assumption that the editorial positions of the Post and/or Journal influence their poll figures.  The Journal/NBC poll does find Biden’s advantage among women isn’t 23 percentage points, like the Post’s.  

It’s 26 points. That happens to be double Hillary Clinton’s final victory margin among women in 2016.

It is altogether fitting and proper that 2020 has become the year of “I am woman, hear me roar” in American politics because it also happens to be the 100th year women have been able to vote for their president, just like the men.  

The 19th Amendment to the Constitution, giving women the right to vote, passed two-thirds of the House and Senate in June of 1919. It was ratified by Tennessee, the last of the required three-quarters of the 48 states, in August 1920, just in time to allow women to vote for Harding or Cox that November.  (Connecticut’s Legislature didn’t get around to ratifying the amendment until 1923, when it didn’t matter any more.)

The first newly enfranchised voters didn’t exactly revel in their victory in that first presidential election a century ago.  Sixty-eight percent of the eligible men turned out, but only 36 percent of the women.  That first generation of women continued to be reluctant to exercise the right their gender had been fighting for since the 1840s. And when they did vote, they usually voted their husbands’ way.

The Baby Boomers changed all that and in every election since 1960, the female turnout has exceeded the male’s. And since 1980, women have differed  from men in their preferences, with more women voting Democratic and more men, Republican.

This is sure to continue even if President Trump manages to confound the pollsters once again next week — or whenever we find out who the winner is in this election year disturbingly unlike any other. If we know two weeks from now, I’ll join the other pundits in offering a learned analysis of why I was right or wrong.

Simsbury resident Dick Ahles is a retired journalist. Email him at rahles1@outlook.com.

Latest News

Love is in the atmosphere

Author Anne Lamott

Sam Lamott

On Tuesday, April 9, The Bardavon 1869 Opera House in Poughkeepsie was the setting for a talk between Elizabeth Lesser and Anne Lamott, with the focus on Lamott’s newest book, “Somehow: Thoughts on Love.”

A best-selling novelist, Lamott shared her thoughts about the book, about life’s learning experiences, as well as laughs with the audience. Lesser, an author and co-founder of the Omega Institute in Rhinebeck, interviewed Lamott in a conversation-like setting that allowed watchers to feel as if they were chatting with her over a coffee table.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hotchkiss students team with Sharon Land Trust on conifer grove restoration

Oscar Lock, a Hotchkiss senior, got pointers and encouragement from Tim Hunter, stewardship director of The Sharon Land Trust, while sawing buckthorn.

John Coston

It was a ramble through bramble on Wednesday, April 17 as a handful of Hotchkiss students armed with loppers attacked a thicket of buckthorn and bittersweet at the Sharon Land Trust’s Hamlin Preserve.

The students learned about the destructive impact of invasives as they trudged — often bent over — across wet ground on the semblance of a trail, led by Tom Zetterstrom, a North Canaan tree preservationist and member of the Sharon Land Trust.

Keep ReadingShow less