Mark Mitchell of Rasmuessen Polls, appeared on Wednesday’s WarRoom program and critically analyzed current polling practices and offered advice on how to navigate potential biases in survey data. Mitchell, who has been closely observing the 2024 presidential race, particularly scrutinized the use of “suppression polls” and emphasized the importance of examining cross-tabulations to uncover underlying issues in polling data.
Mitchell explained to host Peter Navarro on the show, "Suppression polls are designed to create a negative narrative about a candidate. They often use biased questions to skew results.”
He cited a recent Fairleigh Dickinson University poll, noting how it "inflated Harris’s lead by asking loaded questions about gender and race.”
Mitchell advised focusing on cross-tabs, which provide detailed demographic breakdowns. He argued, "Crosstabs reveal how different groups actually feel about the candidates, which can expose inconsistencies and biases in the top-line numbers.”
His analysis of current polls suggested that, despite Harris’s apparent lead, Trump’s past performance in similar situations shows he can overcome these deficits.
According to Mitchell, suppression polls are often crafted with specific biases to drive a negative narrative about a candidate. For example, he pointed to the poll by Fairleigh Dickinson University that showed Kamala Harris leading Donald Trump by seven points. He criticized the poll for using loaded questions related to gender and race, which he believes were intended to skew responses and inflate Harris’s lead.
This kind of tactic, Mitchell argued, creates a misleading impression of the race and is a deliberate effort to suppress support for Trump.
Mitchell’s critique extended to how poll results are presented in the media. He observed that some media outlets, such as The Hill, have highlighted these biased results, amplifying the false narrative of Harris’s strong lead. He stressed that such reporting can have a substantial impact on public perception, making it crucial for consumers of polling data to approach these numbers with skepticism and a critical eye.
To counteract the potential distortions caused by suppression polls, Mitchell advised focusing on cross-tabulations, or “crosstabs,” which provide detailed breakdowns of how different demographic groups respond to polling questions.
According to Mitchell, crosstabs are essential for understanding the full context of polling data. They reveal how various subgroups, such as independents or specific age demographics, view the candidates, offering insights that the top-line numbers alone may not show.
Mitchell emphasized that examining crosstabs can help identify inconsistencies and potential biases in poll results. For instance, he noted discrepancies in favorability ratings between different polls, pointing out that polls showing Trump with low favorability among Republicans and independents were inconsistent with other data sources that showed higher favorability among these groups. He suggested that such inconsistencies could indicate sampling errors or deliberate manipulations.
Mitchell’s analysis also included a critique of recent polling trends, particularly those showing Harris with a slight lead over Trump. He questioned the accuracy of these polls, given that Trump has historically performed well in similar situations. By comparing current polls with past elections, he highlighted that Trump has previously overcome similar polling deficits, suggesting that the current data might not be as alarming for Republicans as it appears.
For more from Mark Mitchell, watch the full WarRoom segment from Wednesday:
Mark Mitchell On How Media Uses Suppression Polls To Spin Elections
