Continuing on his latest Fox News radio tour across our Republic analyzing the current state of the Presidential race, President John Pudner traveled to Memphis, Tennessee to discuss the key question on everybody’s mind as we inch closer toward November – which state will be the key to winning the Presidency? Answer: Wisconsin
Pudner, though analyzing polling trends within the eleven closest states during the last three Presidential elections, quantifies not only where the current state of the race has both candidates projected at, but also how Wisconsin, currently on track to lean by 0.4%, well within the recount and margin for error, toward former President Trump, is the most critical state to win for both him and Vice President Harris, as the current trends indicate a 272-266 Electoral College victory for former President Trump if current trends hold OR a similar victory for Harris if the slightest change were to occur during this ever-volatile election cycle, thus underpinning why Wisconsin, not fellow Midwestern states like Pennsylvania or Michigan, for example, is, has been, and will continue to be the key toward winning the presidency.
Both Pudner and hosts Ditch and Tim Van Horn highlight not only how and why Wisconsin will be critical, but how polling has changed for the better to become more precise, how we can continue to analyze trends, both in where campaign stops are held and where public polling is headed, to dissect the evolving state of the race, and how despite the vitriol, divisions, and dysfunction often seen in today’s politics, it's more important than ever for grassroots activists across our Republic to get involved in their communites.
SUMMARY KEYWORDS
Polling, Wisconsin, Trump, Harris, issues, accuracy, swing voters
SPEAKERS
Tim Van Horn, Ditch, and TBOR Action President John Pudner
Ditch 00:00
John Pudner, how you doing this morning, sir?
John Pudner 00:03
Great, thanks for having me!
Ditch 00:04
It's good to have you back on here. The polling that comes out...there's the national poll, the likely voters poll, really boils down to states, especially in the swing states, Pennsylvania, it seems like, becoming more and more the winner take all state. Is that right?
John Pudner 00:22
You know, that's shifted just a little bit. We always look at trend lines over the last month, as of September, and assume they continue, and if that were to happen, Harris would actually pull out Pennsylvania, Nevada, Michigan, and still lose because Georgia, North Carolina, and now Wisconsin are on a two-point shift toward Trump. If that continues, that would be a razor thin 272 to 266 Trump victory without Pennsylvania.
Tim Van Horn 00:51
Wow, I mean, that is razor thin! Now, when we talk about some shifts, is it across the states, John, are you seeing some anecdotal evidence where some of it just rests within specific counties?
John Pudner 01:08
Yes, that's true. When you really drill down, it's specific counties, but that's all pretty well weighted. I always tell people there's some bogus polls a few months out, where someone's just trying to create a narrative. This last month and a half, the pollsters get pretty serious because they get fired if they're wrong in last month and a half. And so, they do adjust for that pretty well, but a lot of this is just how big is the city that a conservative has to overcome? I mean, in Alabama, you're going to go conservative, because Birmingham's only got 200,000 people. Wisconsin's a little tighter with 500,000 in Milwaukee. You really just watch the big city. In Georgia, you have to overcome Atlanta. So, yeah, you always have to break it down that way.
Ditch 01:49
We hear from listeners, and they'll say they don't believe these polls because they have never gotten a call, or I've never heard or worked with somebody who's ever gotten a phone call, from any pollster. Generally, how are they conducted, phone, email, internet, what is it?
John Pudner 02:06
It often comes to the cell phone. Now, this is what's changed so much. I mean, I used to run call centers...this stat may blow you away, but in 2000, when I was calling people for Bush 2000 against Gore, we had 91% answer their phone and 54% would complete a five question survey. Can you imagine today? The numbers are, like, 3%, so now it has to be interactive, people opt in for polling, and you do get a sample. Even if I'm a 59 year old guy living in the Midwest, and I never get a call, some other 59 year old guy living in the Midwest with a similar background gets one. They do tend to be within a point or two in the end.
Tim Van Horn 02:52
As you look at the two candidates, I know that Kamala Harris had this big Unite for America event, and then you see Trump out on the campaign trail. Are either of them making headway at this point in their messaging? I know Kamala has got basically Lindsey Davis, and then also Oprah, kind of helping, have her back on answering some of these questions. Do you think that Donald Trump is putting out a positive enough message and contrasting well enough that is resonating?
John Pudner 03:29
You hit it right on the head what has to happen. The swing voter this year is not someone who's torn on issues, the swing voter we see is someone who personally dislikes Trump, and yet, know they agree with him on the issues over her. That's the voter they both have to get. The more Trump makes it issue, issue, issue, come on, inflation, immigration, the more likely he is to win. The more she plays around with words, like he's weird, or he's unpredictable, she's got to make it a personality contest, and that's really what it comes down to for the swing voter.
Ditch 04:06
Did you hear that, Tim? I was right! I said the other day, for her, it's all about him. For him, it's all about the issues. Thank you, John Pudner!
Tim Van Horn 04:14
That's true. I know there's been two assassination attempts, but with the general population, the non-assassins, is threat to democracy resonating with Democrats?
John Pudner 04:27
It is some. It's still a little edge form, but in 2022, that was a huge issue. IIf that was your issue, you were for Democrats, and that's really changed. I just think through all the court cases, beyond the obviously couple of nuts who've taken a shot at him, but you're trying to imprison, and bankrupt, and get off the ballot your political opponent. That's kind of even that issue up where people say, "Wait a second, is that a bigger threat to democracy? Are we going to grt rid of our opponent?" They still get people based on January 6th, and the reaction to that, but it's closer to 50/50 issue now, which really hurts the Democrats this year.
Ditch 05:08
Hey, John, one last question for you. The accuracy of polls over all of the campaigns that you've worked with, and all of the polling you've done over the years, do you see, generally, they're getting more accurate or less accurate? Or has there been a drastic change? Because, the methodology of getting the people has changed significantly, and as you just said, you used to get everybody would answer the telephone. Now it's different.
Tim Van Horn 05:37
That and the hesitancy.
John Pudner 05:41
They're getting it back to where they're pretty accurate again, I'd say they were even more accurate a few decades ago, when everyone answered their phone, but they've adjusted them pretty well. I mean, we could use just landlines to about 2006, we have to use cell phones now, and now they don't want to actually talk, they just want to be interactive on the phone. If you have enough money to poll, it's extremely accurate, so the campaigns have extremely accurate polls because, for them, it's worth the money, but for someone who's just publishing to get some viewers, you just can't put in the same kind of money that the candidates can. I'd almost look more closely sometimes at where the candidates are visiting, then you know what their polls are telling them, and that those are more accurate even though you never see those numbers.
Ditch 06:29
John Pudner, it's great to have you on again. Thank you for the insight.
Comments