This morning, we concluded our wave of New York Times/Siena College post-debate polls in the battlegrounds, along with a special look at Ohio and its Senate race.
Kamala Harris led among likely voters by one percentage point in Michigan, two points in Wisconsin and nine points in Nebraska’s Second Congressional District. Donald J. Trump led in Ohio by six points among likely voters, 50 percent to 44 percent (he won the state by eight points in 2020).
When you add the other recent Times/Siena polls to the picture, the takeaway is clear: This is an extremely close election.
Imagine, for a moment, that the latest Times/Siena polls in every key state were right on the mark. They won’t be, of course, but here’s the result you would get in the Electoral College:
Harris 270, Trump 268.
In terms of the electoral count, it would be the closest modern U.S. presidential election.
If you average the six polls we did in core battleground states (we skipped Nevada in our most recent round), Mr. Trump led by an average of just 0.6 of a point.
We’ve had a lot of close elections in recent memory, but in none of them were the polls so close. In each of 2008, 2012, 2016 and 2020, a candidate led by at least a few points in enough states to make one candidate a material if not overwhelming favorite. As Hillary Clinton can attest, a modest but clear lead is not a guarantee of victory. But here, neither Ms. Harris nor Mr. Trump can claim even that.
This may be a year when the polls won’t suggest that any candidate is a favorite.
Looking back at Pennsylvania
Let’s step back and look at where these six states stand, comparing the presidential result in 2020 in each with the latest Times/Siena poll:
Pennsylvania (Biden +1.2 in 2020): Harris +4
Wisconsin (Biden+ 0.6): Harris +2
Michigan (Biden+ 2.8): Harris +1
North Carolina (Trump +1.3): Trump +3
Georgia (Biden+ 0.2): Trump +4
Arizona (Biden+ 0.3): Trump +5
Of these Times/Siena polls, the Pennsylvania survey stands out as Vice President Harris’s best result. Nowhere else is she running so far ahead of President Biden’s 2020 performance, and no state is more important.
Unlike in other states, we began our survey in Pennsylvania the night after the debate. As I mentioned in our write-up at the time, there were a few hints that the results were a little too favorable for Ms. Harris.
With memories of the debate fading and subsequent results looking stronger for Mr. Trump, it makes one wonder if a Times/Siena poll today would show a closer race there. We’ll be back in the field in Pennsylvania at some point next month.
Democrats down-ballot: Ohio
The competitive Senate races keep coming up “blue” in our polling.
Democratic Senate candidates led in Michigan, Wisconsin and, yes, even Ohio, where Sherrod Brown led by four points over the Republican Bernie Moreno, 47 percent to 43 percent.
If the poll is right, Mr. Moreno will need more than undecided Trump voters to break his way. Mr. Brown would still lead by two points, 50-48, if voters who are currently undecided in the Senate race chose the candidate who aligns with the party of their presidential vote choice. Instead, Mr. Brown leads because he has the support of 10 percent of Mr. Trump’s backers. To win, Mr. Moreno will need to pull some of that support back.
Given Mr. Brown’s dependence on Trump voters, this race could easily tighten — or perhaps even turn red by November. Two years ago, the Senate race between JD Vance and Tim Ryan was close at this stage, but Mr. Vance pulled ahead down the stretch. It’s not hard to imagine a repeat.
Despite that 2022 win, Mr. Vance does not appear to be a home state hero. Overall, 45 percent of voters in his home state say they have a favorable view of him, compared with 47 percent unfavorable. That’s no better than Ohio’s view of the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, Tim Walz, who is at 41 percent favorable and 42 percent unfavorable.
Democrats down-ballot: Nebraska
As mentioned earlier, Ms. Harris would win 270 electoral votes — exactly the number needed to win — if the Times/Siena polls were precisely right.
But this is only the case because Nebraska does not award its five electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis; instead, the winner statewide receives two votes while the winner of each congressional district receives one. Thanks to this quirk, Ms. Harris is expected to win one additional electoral vote, as she has a big lead in our poll of Nebraska’s Second District, which encompasses Omaha.
In recent weeks, Republican politicians made a last-minute effort to change the rules and award Nebraska’s electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis. The effort seems to have failed; if the Times/Siena polling is any indication, there’s a chance it may have backfired as well.
In the race for U.S. House, the Democrat Tony Vargas leads the Republican incumbent, Don Bacon, by three points, 49-46.
Mr. Bacon seems to squeak by in this Democratic-leaning district in every election, but this is the first time he has trailed in a Times/Siena poll — and we’ve polled this district several times over the last six years. Mr. Bacon endorsed the effort to change Nebraska’s electoral vote system, and one wonders whether that might be a factor in his weakness.
In the poll, 61 percent of voters in the district said they supported the current system of awarding electoral votes by district, while 31 percent said Nebraska should award all of its votes to the statewide winner. (It’s easy to see why voters feel that way: It gives them influence and attention.)
There’s also a race for U.S. Senate worth considering: between the Republican incumbent, Deb Fischer, and an independent candidate, Dan Osborn. Several statewide polls in Nebraska have shown a close race between the two, even though Mr. Trump won the state by 19 points in 2020.
The Times/Siena poll covers only one-third of the state’s voters, but it shows Mr. Osborn ahead by 11 points, 49-38. That’s certainly better than Mr. Biden’s six-point win in this district four years ago, but it’s well short of the 19-point overperformance (or about a 25-point lead in this district) he would need to win statewide.
If this poll is correct, the burden on him to perform well elsewhere in the state is considerable.
The post Could We See a 270-268 Election? The Polls Are Tighter Than Ever. appeared first on New York Times.