Premature Polling

Surveys can only test one point in time

If you value articles like this, sign up for our daily email newsletter and support us with a donation.

A number of current political studies are surfacing that show conflicting data, or analyze would-be political campaigns that clearly won't happen. Yet, they still produce some marginally useful information.

The first set of contradictory surveys pertains to recent job approval ratings for President Donald Trump. The two polls in question produced diametrically opposed results when asking the same question during the same time period. 

The American Research Group tested the Trump favorability rating over the Feb. 17-20 period and found the President with an upside-down ratio, 43:51% favorable-to-unfavorable – a negative spread of eight percentage points. 

Within the same timeframe, Harvard University also tested the American registered voter electorate, but found a completely different favorability ratio. According to the Harvard data, Mr. Trump has a positive rating spread of nine percentage points, 52:43% favorable-to-unfavorable. 

Therefore, the two professionally-conducted surveys, executed within the same period (Feb. 17-20), and targeting a like audience (registered voters) for the same purpose (testing presidential job approval) arrive at completely different responses. 

It is probable that the Harvard poll is closer to the accuracy mark, as another surveyor, the Morning Consult data organization, conducted a national tracking poll within the same late February period. The MC study projects Mr. Trump with a plus 3 favorable job approval ratio, 50:47%.

The large disparity found within these and other similar surveys conducted since President Trump began his second term on Jan. 20 suggest certain polling flaws, or that the public is displaying inconsistent hot and cold tendencies toward the former and current chief executive. Even the latter possibility, however, is an improvement when compared to the President's first-term standing, when his approval ratings were uniformly negative.

A newly-released campaign poll should be ignored, but not because the data results are necessarily wrong. The reason is one of the tested principals has definitively stated he is not running for the Senate.

The campaign in question is the 2026 Massachusetts Senate race featuring incumbent Sen. Ed Markey (D), who, counting his long career in the House, has been in Congress since 1976, and former two-term Governor Charlie Baker (R). The latter man, now president of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), has repeatedly said that he will not run for the Senate. 

The Feb. 14-20 survey, from the University of Massachusetts, posts Sen. Markey to only a two-point edge over ex-Gov. Baker, 35-33%. Aside from testing a candidate who is not running, the sampling universe consists of adults and not likely or even registered voters. Therefore, the poll results, which also appear to undercount each man's support, are not useful.

Another questionable statewide survey, but one that does monitor candidates who are running, tests the Virginia electorate regarding their open 2025 Governor's campaign. 

The Roanoke College Institute for Policy and Opinion Research, which has been known in the past for releasing anomalous survey results, fielded its study of 690 likely Virginia general election voters over the Feb. 17-20 period. The Roanoke ballot test sees former US Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D) leading Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle Sears (R) by a 39-24% spread, which appears to underestimate not only Ms. Sears' support, but also Ms. Spanberger's.

Furthermore, their ballot test results are inconsistent with the other five Virginia Governor polls conducted and publicized since the 2024 election. The latter surveys, from five different pollsters, cast Spanberger and Sears in a dead heat (co/efficient survey research firm) – Spanberger plus 1 (Emerson College), plus 3 (Mason-Dixon Polling & Strategy), plus 5 (Christopher Newport University) and Spanberger plus 10 (Virginia Commonwealth University). 

While these polls still provide some useful information, those currently testing political campaigns produce results so early in the election cycle that typically fail to properly capture the studied candidates' accurate standing in reference to a future final result.  This is because polls can only test one point in time. 

Therefore, once we see campaigns beginning to spend voter contact money to deliver their message and project a theme, the ballot test results can be more seriously considered and analyzed. 

Jim Ellis is a 35-year veteran of politics at the state and national levels. He has served ss executive director for two national political action committees, as well as a consultant to the three national Republican Party organizations in DC, the National Federation of Independent Business, and various national conservative groups.

Born and raised in Sacramento, California, he earned a B. A. in Political Science from the University of California at Davis in 1979. Jim raised his daughter, Jacqueline, alone after his wife died following a tragic car accident. He helped establish the Joan Ellis Victims Assistance Network in Rochester, NH. Jim also is a member of the Northern Virginia Football Officials Association, which officiates high school games throughout the region.

Editor's note:

HOW SOULS AND LIBERTY WILL MOVE FORWARD THE NEXT FOUR YEARS

There can be no doubt we have witnessed an extraordinary moment in the history of the United States and the world. The election of Donald Trump to a second Presidential term is a great victory for Christian patriots, but it is not a complete or final victory. Rather, it is a reprieve from the ceaseless assaults on life, liberty and faith we have had to endure for four years.

Donald Trump is president once again, and his decisions, Cabinet selections, and force of personality are shaping the United States and the world in ways we could only dream of.

We have a Heaven-sent opportunity to step up and ensure this victory is not merely a one-off, but the first of many and the foundation of a lasting legacy of patriotic, Christian, pro-family policies.

Souls and Liberty will be part of that effort, but we cannot do it without you. It will require reporting and activism that YOU can be a part of.

Can you step up and support us? Just once – a one-time donation is very valuable. Or, better yet, support us every month with a recurring donation. Thank you, and may God bless you.

Stephen Wynne

Editor-in-Chief, Souls and Liberty