Enten reacts to polls claiming a +4 GOP gain

There is something of a fight going on right now inside nerd data world and it has to do with the polling we've seen around the country and it has to do with the difference we've seen in some polls between registered voters and likely voters. Now let me tell you there's no better fight than a fight between data nerds. And with us now is CNN chief data analyst. Harriet, this might sound, I think, a little bit obscure in the weeds, but I think it's important, and I think people will find this very interesting here. So what are we seeing in the polling right now in terms of the difference between people that the pollsters are calling registered voters and likely voters? Yeah, okay, so registered voters are all those people who are registered to vote. Likely voters are the ones who are likely to show up and vote in the election, right? And those are the ones that we often pay attention to. And what's so interesting here is we see this massive split between what we see in the national polls for the national House ballot and what we see in the key Senate races. So what do we see? The average gain going from all to likely voters. Republicans are gaining just a point, just a point in the national House ballot. But look at this. In the key Senate races, they are averaging a four-point gain, significantly higher than we see in the national polls. Now, I should note that this is among pollsters who released both registered voters And likely voter results. That's what we're looking at here. But what we're seeing is amongst that group, Republicans are gaining significantly more in the Senate races than they are in the House races. So when you look at likely voters, four points higher for Republicans in these key races. Correct. When we look at past elections, right, has that been the case? Yeah, I don't buy this four number. I just don't. I just don't. I think it's significantly too high. Why do I say that? Well, why don't we look here? The gain in party ID in midterms with Republican presidents, like we have this year. Okay, and we're talking about going from all to validated voters. Look at this. And the party ID from 1982 to 2018 nationally. Look at this. Republicans gained one point on average. How about in 2018? Again, it was one point on average. That looks a whole heck of a lot more like what we're seeing in the national polling than what we are seeing in that key Senate race polling, where right now it's a four point. That is very much not in line with what we've seen historically when we look at the national party ID. And what about the key races again? Yeah, OK. So you say, oh, but you know, that's the national. What about the key races? Well, why don't we just look back at 2018? OK. Going from all the validated voters, look, in the key 2018 Senate races, Republicans gained, but again, it was just two points, not anywhere close, not anywhere close to that four points. And if you look in the key Senate races back in 2018, Republicans gained just a point in those races. Again, much more like what we're seeing in that national numbers than we're seeing in those Senate, key Senate race numbers. And so to me, I look at those numbers and I go. I don't buy it. I think Democrats are actually probably going to do better on Election Day than those likely voter numbers are in at least some of those states. Yeah, and by the way, good on the pollsters who released both and let you see a little bit of the methodology. This is not a critique necessarily of the pollsters. I'm just saying what historically has held. So take a look at you as a consumer. Take a look at both of them and consider it for yourselves there. In general right now, what are the prediction markets saying about all this? Yeah, and this is the other thing. You know, the prediction markets, which are trying to take all this into account, The chance that Democrats win. The Senate in 2026, according to the Kalshi prediction market, look at this, it's a 64% chance that Democrats do in fact win back control of the Senate. That's up significantly from where we were just a few months ago. All right, Harry, and I appreciate this discussion. I hope the audience appreciates it. It's a little bit of nerdom, but you know what? We're two nerds, so we figure, why not join the nerd party? It is an interesting discussion that is out there right now. Go to social media. You can find some very angry data people right now. Oh, yeah. Harriet, and thank you very much. Among the Republican leaders on the trail for critical races today is House Speaker Mike Johnson. He's in Iowa. CNN's Manu Raju caught up with the speaker while the speaker was campaigning for vulnerable Republican congressman Zach Nunn. That was in Fort Dodge, Iowa. So I want to talk to Mike Johnson about the president's travels and whether or not the president is really helping Republican candidates, as he argues. There's no drag at all. The president's out. No, no drag at all. The president is out doing these events and he's having huge turnout, as you've seen. It's just like 2024. That's what it feels like to me. I have been in all the swing districts. I'm going everywhere. I've traveled more, campaigned more than anybody this whole cycle, of course. And I've seen the voters on the ground. I'm telling you, the polls are wrong. They're inaccurate. They're underrepresenting Republicans. And many of the pollsters have admitted that. I mean, CNN's run a story this week. That acknowledges that 15 out of the last 16 elections, Republicans were underrepresented, underestimated in the October generic ballot by an average of four points. So the polling is inaccurate. Republicans aren't responding anymore. They're not participating. But then why are you guys battling in these deep red Trump districts? I mean, this is where the battle for the House is. You're spending millions in these very Republican districts. These are difficult districts every cycle. Zach and Marianne Miller-Meeks in Iowa, for example, here. There's some Trump plus 10, Trump plus 14 districts where you guys are fighting right now. Well, you've seen a very consistent outcome. Outcomes in Iowa, we always win, but it's close. I noted to the group here this morning, Marianne Miller-Meeks won her first race a few terms ago by six votes in Iowa. So Iowa's a battleground for us. We have battlegrounds around the country. Some are in deep blue states, some are in red states, but that's the way it shakes out. There was redistricting done in a lot of states, and so we have to win in the districts that are presented, and we're leaving everything on the field to get it done. How much does that have to do with concerns about affordability, gas prices, and should your party have done more on issues of gas prices in particular? Given the voter blowback here. No, listen, every election is about the economy. It's always about kitchen table issues, as we say. We have done what we said we were going to do. We gave the largest tax cut in history. What gas prices, though? In Iowa, right now, the average Iowan has $3,100 in their pocket that they didn't have to send to Washington because of our bill. The average household in Iowa is $6,000 plus in real wage increases. We cut taxes on tips, overtime, Social Security. This is real money for hardworking families. Gas prices are too high. But this is a very important distinction. They're too high right now because of the yet unresolved conflict in Iran. We think that turns a corner right after the election. You heard the speaker there, very rosy, saying that they are going to keep the House of Representatives. But Manu asked the speaker, what happens if they don't? What happens if Democrats do win? And he asked the speaker to address concerns about whether the president and Republicans will accept those results. Will you vow to seat every Democrat who wins on January 3rd? Of course, this is just nonsense narrative. We are going to follow the law. What if Trump says it's a rigged election? Look, I'm a constitutional law attorney. I have always been steady and consistent about this. This is going to be a no drama swearing in ceremony, but we are going to hold the majority, and I'm going to be the Speaker of the House. And when I administer the oath, everyone on January 3rd, we'll administer the oath to everybody. If Trump says don't seat them, you'll resist them. I'll do my job as the Speaker of the House. The President has vowed, of course, he wants to follow the law as well. Our smart reporters are here now. Tamara, it's so interesting to hear this. He has to say what he's saying, of course. And it is true that a lot of the seats, particularly in Iowa, but around the country, have been close. But it's also true, Manu said, that they are competing. In very red territory, they're back on their heels in so many more districts than Republicans had assumed, including districts that were redrawn intended to benefit them just last year in the last year. Yeah, I have reporting out this week that of the 15 districts that were drawn to be more Republican, only about a third of them are thought to be a sure thing for Republicans. The others are much more competitive. They are some of the most competitive and most expensive congressional races in the country. Places like Florida 25, the districts in Texas, North Carolina's first congressional district. Millions, like $40 million is being spent on air, according to Ad Impact, in some of those races. That is money that they wouldn't have expected to have to spend in districts that are Trump plus 10, Trump plus more.