https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2024-election-forecast/
Those polls — most notably from Emerson College, Marist College and The New York Times, three of the most prolific pollsters in America — show Harris and former President Donald Trump tied in the northern battlegrounds and Harris trailing heavily in Florida. But our forecast came to a different conclusion:
這些民調——最著名的來自愛默生學院、瑪麗斯特學院和《紐約時報》，它們是美國最活躍的三大民調機構——顯示哈裏斯與前總統唐納德·特朗普在北方的關鍵戰場持平，而哈裏斯在佛羅裏達州大幅落後。但我們的預測得出了不同的結論：
不論Emerson民調結果如何，算哈領先一分。
The polls from Emerson in particular have tended to underestimate Harris compared to polls with the same methodology (a mix of robocalls and online interviews) in the same geographies. This means our starting point when looking at these new polls is that Harris is doing better than they indicate, by about a point on vote margin, and that she is either holding steady or gaining ground.
尤其是愛默生學院的民調，往往低估了哈裏斯的表現，與其他采用相同方法（混合使用自動電話和在線訪談）的民調相比，在相同地區結果有所偏差。這意味著我們在解讀這些新民調時的起點是，哈裏斯的表現比數據所顯示的要好，投票差距大約領先一個百分點，而且她的支持率要麽保持穩定，要麽有所提升。
給川普去掉一個最高分。什麽，紐約時報的？紐約時報的也得扣除。
But The New York Times/Siena College poll in Florida should worry Democrats. It single-handedly moved the 538 poll average in the state from Trump+4 to Trump +5, and could indicate broader weakness of pollsters to sample Republican voters properly. However, The Times’s surveys in Texas and Montana came in right on target with our forecast, prompting our model to think the race is more of the same than worth a dramatic shift in estimates. So this is a good place to remind you: More of the same in forecasting today is still forecasting a toss-up race.
但《紐約時報》/錫耶納學院在佛羅裏達州的民調應該引起民主黨的擔憂。它單獨將538網站上佛州的民調平均值從特朗普領先4個百分點推高至領先5個百分點，這可能表明民調機構在正確抽樣共和黨選民方麵存在更廣泛的問題。然而，《紐約時報》在得克薩斯州和蒙大拿州的調查結果卻與我們的預測非常吻合，這使得我們的模型認為這場競選的整體態勢沒有發生顯著變化。因此，這是提醒你的好時機：今天的預測仍然顯示競選結果難分勝負。
