The Selzer Surprise and lying eyes 👀
🚨 Trump HQ sees Tar Heel Blue 🔵 + Harris' half a million vote lead in PA.
Cheers to Ann Selzer.
The Iowa pollster’s fabled reputation allowed her shocking survey showing a three-point Donald Trump deficit in a seemingly safe Republican state to further rattle a race that remains consumed by conflicting data.
At the same time the political world wrestled with the possibility of a seismic erosion of Trump support in the Midwest, it also had to contend with New York Times’ numbers that bucked conventional wisdom about the neighboring Blue Wall states.
Wisconsin, a state many had begun to see as Harris’ toughest, produced a 3-point lead in her favor. In Michigan, the bluest of the big three, it was *Trump* by a point. And what would Pennsylvania be if not *tied* in the final Times read of the race, a slight regression for Kamala Harris compared to previous surveys.
One possible piece of symmetry in the weekend data dump: Overwhelmingly white Wisconsin and Iowa in alignment and rushing toward Harris, powered on the backs of older women.
“If you had to play the odds, this time Selzer will probably be wrong,” declared Nate Silver.
If she’s right, Silver’s data-driven franchise will be set afire and Selzer will be anointed to political Sainthood.
Because Iowa only holds 6 electoral votes, it is not likely determinative in the race to 270. But if Harris loses Wisconsin, but holds Pennsylvania and Michigan, she could pair Iowa with Nevada to get to 272 electoral votes — unlikely but not improbable.
For now, let’s stick with the most anticipated scenarios based on what we can see with our own two eyes.
Let’s start with the candidates schedules.
In the final three days of the campaign, Trump has held more stops in North Carolina …
