WEBVTT 01:40.133 --> 01:41.933 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% Funding for “To the Contrary,” 01:41.933 --> 01:45.666 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% provided by: 01:51.433 --> 01:53.533 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% Coming up on “To the Contrary”: 01:53.533 --> 01:56.700 align:left position:12.5% line:5% size:77.5% Gender is one of the defining fault lines of our politics 01:56.700 --> 01:57.066 align:left position:40% line:5% size:50% today. 01:57.633 --> 01:58.900 align:left position:37.5% line:5% size:52.5% You know, one of the starkest contrasts 01:58.900 --> 02:02.233 align:left position:22.5% line:5% size:67.5% right now is when you talk about “cat lady” 02:02.233 --> 02:05.233 align:left position:17.5% line:5% size:72.5% and some of the comments that Trump and Vance make. 02:05.233 --> 02:08.233 align:left position:42.5% line:5% size:47.5% Women find it very disrespectful. 02:27.066 --> 02:28.633 align:left position:20% line:5% size:70% Hello, I'm Bonnie Erbé. 02:28.633 --> 02:31.800 align:left position:12.5% line:5% size:77.5% Welcome to “To the Contrary,” a weekly discussion of news 02:31.800 --> 02:34.866 align:left position:10% line:5% size:80% and social trends from diverse perspectives. 02:35.133 --> 02:37.433 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% We are in the final month of the campaign. 02:37.433 --> 02:41.900 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% And women voters and issues affecting women of all races 02:41.900 --> 02:45.500 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% and of all diverse types are dominating the campaign. 02:45.866 --> 02:47.600 align:left position:40% line:83% size:50% With us to sort through the noise 02:47.600 --> 02:50.700 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% and help everyone understand what lies ahead, 02:50.700 --> 02:52.166 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% are Democratic pollster, 02:52.166 --> 02:55.633 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% Linda Lake of Lake Research, and Amanda Iovino, 02:55.866 --> 02:59.633 align:left position:35% line:83% size:55% Republican pollster of WPA Intel. 02:59.633 --> 03:02.166 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% Welcome to you, both. Thank you so much for having us. 03:02.166 --> 03:04.366 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% And it's great to be on here with Amanda. 03:04.366 --> 03:06.500 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% Yeah, it's great to be on here. Thank you. 03:06.500 --> 03:07.666 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% All right. Terrific. 03:07.666 --> 03:10.900 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% And let's just jump right in by asking you 03:11.166 --> 03:14.100 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% how big an issue is gender in this campaign. 03:14.100 --> 03:16.800 align:left position:17.5% line:5% size:72.5% The coalition that Harris has put together 03:16.800 --> 03:18.966 align:left position:32.5% line:5% size:57.5% is different than the Biden coalition. 03:18.966 --> 03:21.233 align:left position:12.5% line:5% size:77.5% There is a bigger gender gap. 03:21.233 --> 03:23.700 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% She has created an incredible enthusiasm 03:23.700 --> 03:26.966 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% among pro-abortion voters, even more than 03:28.133 --> 03:28.700 align:left position:37.5% line:89% size:52.5% Joe Biden 03:29.100 --> 03:31.700 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% had done, registering a lot of young people, 03:32.433 --> 03:34.966 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% registering a lot of women of color, 03:34.966 --> 03:37.466 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% so the gender of the voters and the gender 03:37.466 --> 03:38.633 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% of the issues, i.e. 03:38.633 --> 03:40.966 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% abortion, although I would argue abortion is a man 03:40.966 --> 03:43.400 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% and a woman's issue, and the gender of the candidate 03:43.400 --> 03:44.966 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% are all making a big difference. 03:44.966 --> 03:47.966 align:left position:15% line:5% size:75% Yeah, I think from a voter perspective, it's a major issue, 03:47.966 --> 03:50.233 align:left position:10% line:5% size:80% you know, along with education. 03:50.233 --> 03:52.200 align:left position:12.5% line:5% size:77.5% And of course, partisanship. Gender is one of 03:52.200 --> 03:55.166 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% the defining fault lines of our politics today. 03:56.066 --> 03:59.100 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% Gender determines how campaigns, news 03:59.100 --> 04:01.166 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% and even issues are perceived. 04:01.166 --> 04:02.933 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% But what's been interesting is 04:02.933 --> 04:06.000 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% that gender is less of an issue within the campaigns itself, 04:06.000 --> 04:10.100 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% particularly relative to 2016 and even 2020. 04:10.433 --> 04:12.066 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% On the Democratic side, certainly, 04:12.066 --> 04:14.366 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% I think the media has learned some of its lessons 04:14.366 --> 04:16.233 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% and Harris has as well. 04:17.800 --> 04:19.900 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% Frankly, what Republican women 04:19.900 --> 04:22.933 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% candidates have frankly learned or knew intuitively 04:22.933 --> 04:27.366 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% that playing the gender identity game doesn't help with voters 04:27.366 --> 04:29.233 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% as much as they might want it to. That 04:29.233 --> 04:31.733 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% really focusing on the issues is what voters want to hear. 04:31.733 --> 04:34.733 align:left position:32.5% line:5% size:57.5% Kamala Harris has not been raising gender, 04:35.000 --> 04:38.700 align:left position:10% line:5% size:80% really, or race for that matter very much, if at all. 04:39.300 --> 04:41.500 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% Is that the best way for her to campaign? 04:41.500 --> 04:43.500 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% Trump keeps bringing it up. 04:43.500 --> 04:45.300 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% I think that it is the smartest way. 04:45.300 --> 04:48.333 align:left position:12.5% line:5% size:77.5% I think it's a new generation of leadership. 04:48.333 --> 04:50.066 align:left position:22.5% line:5% size:67.5% It's a new generation of feminism, 04:50.066 --> 04:50.933 align:left position:17.5% line:5% size:72.5% which, believe it or not, 04:51.266 --> 04:53.333 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% is still a very popular word with people. 04:53.333 --> 04:56.333 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% And two-thirds of women describe themselves as feminism. 04:57.033 --> 04:59.933 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% But we don't have to be told she's a woman candidate. 04:59.933 --> 05:01.266 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% We can see she's a woman candidate. 05:01.266 --> 05:04.100 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% We don't have to be told she's a woman of color. 05:04.100 --> 05:05.233 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% We can see that. 05:05.233 --> 05:09.033 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% And her personal story and her agenda reflect 05:09.300 --> 05:11.733 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% some of these issues. She's made much more prominent, 05:11.733 --> 05:13.900 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% for example, the caregiving agenda. 05:13.900 --> 05:18.033 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% She's very, very comfortable and very identified with freedom 05:18.033 --> 05:20.400 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% to have an abortion, to make your own decisions, 05:20.400 --> 05:22.100 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% personal, medical decisions. 05:22.100 --> 05:25.033 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% So she's telling it in an integrated way. 05:25.033 --> 05:27.300 align:left position:35% line:83% size:55% It is part and parcel of who she is. 05:27.300 --> 05:30.133 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% She doesn't need to wave a banner around. 05:30.133 --> 05:32.733 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% It's something that is evident between the two candidates. 05:32.733 --> 05:34.733 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% It's not something that necessarily needs to be said. 05:34.733 --> 05:38.633 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% And like I mentioned, it's something that Republican women 05:38.633 --> 05:41.200 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% candidates have been dealing with for a long time. 05:41.200 --> 05:43.666 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% And it's nice to kind of see both sides 05:43.666 --> 05:45.200 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% kind of coming to the same conclusion. 05:45.200 --> 05:48.100 align:left position:20% line:5% size:70% When you interview men versus women, 05:48.100 --> 05:49.900 align:left position:10% line:5% size:80% do you talk to them differently? 05:49.900 --> 05:53.200 align:left position:30% line:5% size:60% Do they respond to different issues 05:53.200 --> 05:57.366 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% or even emotional themes differently? 05:57.366 --> 05:59.633 align:left position:25% line:5% size:65% We ask them mostly the same questions. 05:59.633 --> 06:00.266 align:left position:30% line:5% size:60% It's very rare 06:00.566 --> 06:02.066 align:left position:25% line:5% size:65% that we'll ask them different questions, 06:02.066 --> 06:03.366 align:left position:20% line:5% size:70% but how they respond to the questions 06:03.366 --> 06:05.200 align:left position:17.5% line:5% size:72.5% is definitely different. 06:05.200 --> 06:07.333 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% The messages that they react to is different. 06:07.333 --> 06:10.300 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% The issues that they highlight are often different. 06:10.300 --> 06:11.933 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% The language that they use to respond 06:11.933 --> 06:15.566 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% when we ask them an open ended question is different. 06:15.566 --> 06:17.266 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% And all of that is kind of factored 06:17.266 --> 06:19.566 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% into our analysis and the strategic 06:19.566 --> 06:21.566 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% kind of insight that we provide to the campaigns 06:21.566 --> 06:22.700 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% then is different. 06:22.700 --> 06:24.700 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% But are there, before we get to Celinda, 06:24.700 --> 06:26.266 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% are there words, Amanda, 06:26.266 --> 06:29.533 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% that you would use with polling women that elicit 06:29.533 --> 06:32.166 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% a better response from your perspective 06:32.166 --> 06:33.266 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% that you should use 06:33.266 --> 06:35.833 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% and those that you shouldn't use because they don't? 06:35.833 --> 06:39.333 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% When I poll, I typically look for what a candidate is going 06:39.333 --> 06:42.566 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% to say and use the words that the candidate is going to 06:42.566 --> 06:45.700 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% want to use to talk to voters and see how voters respond 06:45.700 --> 06:47.566 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% to that, as opposed to looking 06:47.566 --> 06:50.633 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% to see what a voter of either gender is going to want to hear. 06:50.633 --> 06:53.100 align:left position:37.5% line:83% size:52.5% Sometimes people will respond differently, 06:53.100 --> 06:55.233 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% whether they're being interviewed by a man or a woman. 06:56.033 --> 06:59.000 align:left position:10% line:5% size:80% So, for example, on the abortion issue, women 06:59.000 --> 07:02.333 align:left position:17.5% line:5% size:72.5% who are talking to women before the Dobbs decision 07:02.666 --> 07:06.033 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% were more pro-choice than women who were talking to men. 07:06.733 --> 07:08.233 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% Which is exactly the opposite 07:08.233 --> 07:09.800 align:left position:40% line:83% size:50% of what a lot of us thought it would be. 07:09.800 --> 07:12.400 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% And when we went back and asked people 07:12.400 --> 07:15.366 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% why they had those attitudes, they said, “Well, 07:15.366 --> 07:16.000 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% when I'm talking 07:16.466 --> 07:19.566 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% to women I feel like I can express my ambivalence. 07:19.900 --> 07:20.466 align:left position:37.5% line:89% size:52.5% I can say 07:21.066 --> 07:23.533 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% maybe I wouldn't get an abortion or I worry about this or 07:23.766 --> 07:25.233 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% I'm conflicted by this. 07:25.233 --> 07:27.266 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% When I'm talking to a man, I don't want him 07:27.266 --> 07:28.800 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% to think it's his decision, 07:28.800 --> 07:31.700 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% so I just tell him I'm pro-choice.” 07:31.700 --> 07:34.166 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% So there are some differences like that. 07:34.166 --> 07:36.033 align:left position:37.5% line:83% size:52.5% You know, one of the starkest contrasts 07:36.033 --> 07:39.300 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% right now is when you talk about “cat lady” 07:39.300 --> 07:42.666 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% and some of the comments that Trump and Vance make, women 07:42.666 --> 07:44.800 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% find it very disrespectful and divisive. 07:44.800 --> 07:45.766 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% They don't like it. 07:45.766 --> 07:47.466 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% They don't want their daughters to hear it. 07:47.466 --> 07:49.833 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% Men are like, “Well, I don't like it. 07:49.833 --> 07:51.133 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% But that's Trump being Trump. 07:51.133 --> 07:53.966 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% Sometimes Trump doesn't know when to shut up. 07:53.966 --> 07:57.233 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% He should just not talk because his policies are good, 07:57.233 --> 07:58.366 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% but his rhetoric isnt.” 07:58.366 --> 08:00.700 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% So you do get gender differences 08:00.700 --> 08:02.800 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% in terms of responses to different things 08:02.800 --> 08:04.200 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% that candidates will be saying. 08:04.200 --> 08:05.733 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% How does that play 08:05.733 --> 08:08.633 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% with Republican voters who are supporting Trump? 08:08.633 --> 08:12.666 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% The fact that the women, particularly female Republicans, 08:13.000 --> 08:15.100 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% that they don't want their daughters hearing 08:15.100 --> 08:17.066 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% about what he's saying and what he's doing, 08:17.066 --> 08:19.300 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% what do evangelical women think about this? 08:19.300 --> 08:19.666 align:left position:35% line:89% size:55% I think a. 08:20.366 --> 08:24.066 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% Lot of that is kind of prebaked into who Trump is. 08:24.066 --> 08:26.200 align:left position:40% line:83% size:50% Voters, especially Republican voters, 08:26.200 --> 08:29.133 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% are very much focused on Trump's policies. 08:30.100 --> 08:30.866 align:left position:37.5% line:89% size:52.5% And they 08:31.133 --> 08:33.733 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% believe strongly that the four years under Trump 08:33.733 --> 08:36.633 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% were significantly better, especially economically, 08:36.633 --> 08:38.333 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% than they have been under the last four years 08:38.333 --> 08:40.200 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% with the Biden-Harris administration. 08:40.200 --> 08:42.666 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% And that's really what they're looking forward to 08:42.666 --> 08:45.100 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% under a second Trump administration. 08:45.100 --> 08:48.433 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% So the rhetoric, it kind of goes back to, 08:48.433 --> 08:51.366 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% you know, the 2016 campaign, they didn't. 08:51.366 --> 08:52.833 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% There are a lot of Republican voters 08:52.833 --> 08:55.400 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% that don't necessarily like the way 08:55.400 --> 08:57.933 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% Trump talks about things, but there are a lot of voters 08:57.933 --> 09:02.100 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% that for whom the way Trump talks about issues 09:02.100 --> 09:06.066 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% is a majority of his appeal, especially for voters 09:06.266 --> 09:09.166 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% without college degrees, men without college degrees. 09:09.166 --> 09:11.233 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% They like that he just tells it like it is. 09:11.233 --> 09:12.233 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% And that is a strong, 09:12.233 --> 09:15.500 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% his authenticity is a big part of his appeal. 09:15.500 --> 09:16.266 align:left position:30% line:89% size:60% The media have 09:16.566 --> 09:20.233 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% given a lot of place, Celinda, to the Project 2025 09:20.233 --> 09:22.800 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% agenda put forward by the Heritage Foundation. 09:22.800 --> 09:24.666 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% But using all staff, 09:24.666 --> 09:28.200 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% former staffers and people close to former President Trump. 09:28.400 --> 09:31.433 align:left position:37.5% line:83% size:52.5% Are women scared at all by that agenda? 09:31.433 --> 09:32.100 align:left position:30% line:89% size:60% So originally, 09:32.400 --> 09:35.300 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% people had no idea what the 2025 agenda was, 09:35.300 --> 09:36.933 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% and I really credit the Democrats 09:36.933 --> 09:38.533 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% and their allies for defining it. 09:38.533 --> 09:41.766 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% And now you have 50 some odd percent of the voters 09:41.766 --> 09:43.200 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% who feel negatively toward it, 09:43.200 --> 09:46.833 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% and only about 11% of the voters who feel positive about it. 09:47.500 --> 09:51.233 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% Women were flabbergasted that it included more 09:51.233 --> 09:52.566 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% action on abortion. 09:52.566 --> 09:55.333 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% They thought, haven't you done enough damage already? 09:55.333 --> 09:56.633 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% But you're going after birth control, 09:56.633 --> 10:00.000 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% medication, abortion, criminalizing providers? 10:00.866 --> 10:03.333 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% Women also disliked intensely 10:03.333 --> 10:06.333 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% the cutting of children's programs and Social Security. 10:06.633 --> 10:09.633 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% They disliked doing away with the Department of Education 10:09.933 --> 10:12.366 align:left position:35% line:83% size:55% and women, one of the biggest 10:12.366 --> 10:13.000 align:left position:30% line:89% size:60% Are you talking 10:13.466 --> 10:17.266 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% talking Democratic and Republican women or undecided 10:17.266 --> 10:17.933 align:left position:40% line:89% size:50% voters? 10:18.133 --> 10:21.000 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% Republican women but Democratic women 10:21.000 --> 10:23.900 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% and independent and swing women. 10:23.900 --> 10:27.800 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% So we've done a good job of defining 2025 10:27.800 --> 10:30.866 align:left position:40% line:83% size:50% agenda in a way that alienates women. 10:30.866 --> 10:33.266 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% The hardest thing has been to convince people 10:33.266 --> 10:36.466 align:left position:35% line:83% size:55% that Trump was really for it 10:36.466 --> 10:40.266 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% and that Trump was behind it, and that has 10:40.266 --> 10:41.400 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% been a bit of a struggle. 10:41.400 --> 10:44.266 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% But I think that echoing as you did, that 10:44.266 --> 10:47.266 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% his aides and his advisers wrote a lot of it. 10:47.266 --> 10:50.533 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% People think this is the MAGA agenda, and he's following 10:50.533 --> 10:54.300 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% the MAGA agenda now, which they don't necessarily like. 10:54.300 --> 10:56.200 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% So it's been a big negative. 10:56.200 --> 10:57.700 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% The biggest challenge 10:57.700 --> 11:00.766 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% that the Democrats face, that the vice president face 11:00.766 --> 11:02.133 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% is getting more credibility 11:02.133 --> 11:04.933 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% and increasing credibility on the economy. 11:04.933 --> 11:06.300 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% And just like she gave 11:06.300 --> 11:09.533 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% speeches in the past, she's been emphasizing her proposals. 11:09.833 --> 11:11.166 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% She knows that, too. 11:11.166 --> 11:12.566 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% But that's the biggest challenge 11:12.566 --> 11:15.166 align:left position:40% line:83% size:50% for us, for male and female voters. 11:15.166 --> 11:16.900 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% Now, what do you think the biggest challenges 11:16.900 --> 11:19.833 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% for Trump with male and female voters, Amanda. Getting 11:19.833 --> 11:22.966 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% that enthusiasm up among men 18 to 54. 11:23.500 --> 11:24.833 align:left position:40% line:83% size:50% That's been lagging a little bit. 11:24.833 --> 11:27.900 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% And that's, I think, why you're seeing him kind of go out 11:27.900 --> 11:31.266 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% and talking to different social media influencers. 11:32.666 --> 11:34.833 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% That's one of the big keys. 11:34.833 --> 11:36.133 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% And then reaching out to women, 11:36.133 --> 11:39.133 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% which I think he is doing, perhaps, 11:40.166 --> 11:43.466 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% in his own way and artfully, but really emphasizing 11:43.800 --> 11:45.833 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% that safety elements 11:45.833 --> 11:49.100 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% and, of course, the economic messages and really emphasizing, 11:49.700 --> 11:50.300 align:left position:30% line:89% size:60% how much better 11:50.600 --> 11:52.533 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% the economy was under him and how much 11:52.533 --> 11:54.966 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% how poorly it's been under the Biden-Harris administration. 11:54.966 --> 11:58.266 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% How do you think Republican women have responded to him 11:58.266 --> 12:02.666 align:left position:15% line:5% size:75% recently, telling them that he would be their protector, 12:03.833 --> 12:06.166 align:left position:22.5% line:5% size:67.5% and that he that once he got back 12:06.166 --> 12:09.233 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% into the White House, if he does, 12:09.233 --> 12:12.433 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% that women wouldn't even be thinking about abortion? 12:12.433 --> 12:16.200 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% I kind of, I was a little confused by that, to be honest. 12:16.200 --> 12:20.033 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% You know what he was trying to say in his own way, 12:20.033 --> 12:23.033 align:left position:22.5% line:5% size:67.5% was that his economic and immigration and safety 12:23.033 --> 12:26.600 align:left position:15% line:5% size:75% policies are clearly better for women than Harris'. 12:27.400 --> 12:29.866 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% And that these issues are just as much women's issues 12:29.866 --> 12:30.633 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% as abortion. 12:31.866 --> 12:32.700 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% You know, could he have 12:32.700 --> 12:35.800 align:left position:40% line:83% size:50% said it more like a typical politician? 12:35.800 --> 12:37.700 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% More rehearsed, of course. 12:37.700 --> 12:40.033 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% But this is Donald Trump that we're talking about. 12:40.033 --> 12:43.066 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% And, frankly, his inability to be anything except who 12:43.066 --> 12:46.066 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% he is is part of his appeal. 12:46.300 --> 12:48.566 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% I think the segment of voters that are still reachable 12:48.566 --> 12:49.766 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% by his campaign, 12:49.766 --> 12:52.033 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% who haven't made up his mind, knew exactly 12:52.033 --> 12:54.866 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% what he was talking about and understood everything. 12:54.866 --> 12:57.400 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% What do you both think the down ballot 12:57.400 --> 13:00.566 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% effect of each of the candidates is going to be starting 13:00.566 --> 13:01.833 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% with you, Amanda, 13:01.833 --> 13:05.400 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% though on Republican Senate candidates, on House 13:05.400 --> 13:08.100 align:left position:35% line:83% size:55% candidates and gubernatorial candidates, 13:08.100 --> 13:09.100 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% how's that going to work? 13:09.100 --> 13:11.966 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% It's very much a campaign by campaign issue. 13:11.966 --> 13:14.966 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% I think there are some Senate candidates, especially, 13:14.966 --> 13:16.966 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% who have been able to define themselves, 13:17.933 --> 13:20.133 align:left position:35% line:83% size:55% separately from the presidential, 13:20.133 --> 13:23.233 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% and those will likely have 13:24.566 --> 13:26.600 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% Republican candidates might be able to overperform 13:26.600 --> 13:29.933 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% Democrats might be able to overperform by a point or two. 13:30.300 --> 13:33.300 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% Incumbency will definitely matter there as well. 13:33.700 --> 13:35.933 align:left position:37.5% line:83% size:52.5% And House candidates will be the same way, 13:35.933 --> 13:37.966 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% just to probably a slightly lesser effect. 13:37.966 --> 13:40.600 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% There's a lot of talk or there was about 13:40.600 --> 13:43.733 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% the gubernatorial candidate in North Carolina, Robinson 13:43.733 --> 13:46.900 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% dragging Trump down. 13:46.900 --> 13:50.566 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% Did you think that's what was going to happen if he stayed on? 13:50.566 --> 13:53.566 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% It did look to be the case among independents, 13:53.833 --> 13:57.166 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% but in some initial polling back in August. 13:57.166 --> 14:01.466 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% But there's plenty of time for things to change. 14:01.466 --> 14:02.700 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% And I think it's been pretty clear 14:02.700 --> 14:05.700 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% that Trump has kind of denounced him and 14:05.900 --> 14:08.233 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% tried to put as much separation 14:08.233 --> 14:10.700 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% between himself and that candidate as possible. 14:10.700 --> 14:11.933 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% Well, I think that there 14:11.933 --> 14:14.300 align:left position:22.5% line:5% size:67.5% and the Robinson case is a good example. 14:14.300 --> 14:16.900 align:left position:10% line:5% size:80% There's the Trump effect on down ballot races. 14:16.900 --> 14:20.866 align:left position:10% line:5% size:80% And then there's the down ballot effect on Trump. 14:20.866 --> 14:22.600 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% There are some doozy candidates 14:22.600 --> 14:25.533 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% that have been nominated in these Republican primaries. 14:25.533 --> 14:27.066 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% It's really hard right now 14:27.066 --> 14:29.400 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% for some of the more mainstream Republicans. 14:29.400 --> 14:30.300 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% It's hard for women, 14:30.300 --> 14:32.200 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% and Amanda is an expert on this, 14:32.200 --> 14:34.100 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% to get nominated in the primaries. 14:34.100 --> 14:38.000 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% And so you have some of these very flawed candidates emerging. 14:38.366 --> 14:41.366 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% And Trump will initially endorse him and then have to, 14:42.200 --> 14:45.100 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% you know, separate himself from these candidates. 14:45.100 --> 14:48.733 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% I think the other impact that Trump and Harris have 14:49.000 --> 14:50.966 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% are who they're mobilizing, 14:50.966 --> 14:53.500 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% because if they're bringing in candidates, 14:53.500 --> 14:56.466 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% if they're bringing in new voters, those voters, 14:56.466 --> 14:59.100 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% may just vote down the ticket 14:59.100 --> 15:02.166 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% and send Trump or Harris, his or her team. 15:02.166 --> 15:04.533 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% So I think that's a big impact. 15:04.533 --> 15:07.733 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% And then the agenda that they said, certainly, 15:08.300 --> 15:11.833 align:left position:35% line:83% size:55% Trump being so forceful on the economy 15:13.300 --> 15:14.133 align:left position:30% line:89% size:60% has meant a lot 15:14.500 --> 15:17.133 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% of Democrats have had to address weaknesses on the economy. 15:17.966 --> 15:20.266 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% The fact that Harris is so strong on abortion 15:20.266 --> 15:22.600 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% have meant that a lot of candidates who weren't planning 15:22.600 --> 15:25.066 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% to have a whole campaign talking about abortion 15:25.066 --> 15:27.233 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% have had to answer that issue. 15:27.233 --> 15:30.466 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% And, for example, in the Tester-Sheehy race in Montana, 15:31.066 --> 15:32.866 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% there's an initiative on the ballot. 15:32.866 --> 15:33.633 align:left position:37.5% line:89% size:52.5% And it's 15:34.133 --> 15:36.633 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% a very clear distinction because Tester said, “I vote yes.” 15:36.633 --> 15:38.366 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% Sheehy said he'll vote no. 15:38.366 --> 15:39.566 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% And it's been a struggle. 15:39.566 --> 15:41.133 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% It's been one of the things that's gained 15:41.133 --> 15:44.266 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% some points back for Tester because people are like, 15:44.266 --> 15:46.700 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% “This is in our Constitution, we like this.” 15:46.700 --> 15:49.033 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% And so that has the issue, 15:49.033 --> 15:52.200 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% agenda has seeped down to some of the other candidates. 15:52.766 --> 15:56.300 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% I do think one of the other factors here is, because 15:57.266 --> 15:58.400 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% some of these swing voters 15:58.400 --> 16:01.466 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% this year are college educated voters, 16:01.766 --> 16:04.766 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% thinking specifically about do places like Minnesota, 16:04.966 --> 16:07.800 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% where the vice presidential nominee 16:07.800 --> 16:09.333 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% on the Democratic side 16:09.333 --> 16:13.366 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% is from, there are a lot of swing voters 16:13.366 --> 16:16.366 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% who might lean towards voting for the Democrats 16:16.366 --> 16:17.700 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% on the top of the ticket. 16:17.700 --> 16:20.566 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% But frankly, the last, you know, couple of years 16:20.566 --> 16:23.666 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% under Walz, he's really raised their taxes by a lot. 16:24.533 --> 16:25.566 align:left position:30% line:89% size:60% And they might 16:25.566 --> 16:26.433 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% when they're looking at kind 16:26.433 --> 16:28.666 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% of the state races down the ballot, 16:28.666 --> 16:30.700 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% might be leaning towards splitting their ticket. 16:30.700 --> 16:32.266 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% And there's I think 16:32.266 --> 16:33.866 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% when you're having more of these swing 16:33.866 --> 16:36.033 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% voters be college educated voters, 16:36.033 --> 16:37.100 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% they're potentially 16:37.100 --> 16:39.233 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% more likely to be looking to split their tickets, 16:39.233 --> 16:40.300 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% especially when you're looking 16:40.300 --> 16:42.133 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% at a federal versus a state race. 16:42.133 --> 16:46.166 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% When we've tested, by the way, Bonnie, to the 2025 agenda, 16:46.700 --> 16:49.433 align:left position:40% line:83% size:50% that's something that has coattails to. 16:49.433 --> 16:52.400 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% And so we found, Amanda is raising a really good point, 16:52.733 --> 16:56.200 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% that when we found that, we can say, you know, that 16:56.666 --> 16:58.900 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% Trump is for this and the Senate candidate, 16:58.900 --> 17:01.100 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% the MAGA Republican Senate candidates for this. 17:01.100 --> 17:01.566 align:left position:35% line:89% size:55% And people 17:01.566 --> 17:02.266 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% think, “Well, 17:02.466 --> 17:04.033 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% I might vote for Trump for other reasons, 17:04.033 --> 17:05.600 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% but then I'm going to have to balance that vote 17:05.600 --> 17:09.100 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% by sending a Democratic senator who's opposed to 2025.” 17:09.433 --> 17:10.900 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% So there is some balancing 17:10.900 --> 17:14.033 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% going on in the voters minds, particularly these last, 17:14.733 --> 17:17.800 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% undecided voters who aren't that rooted in partisanship. 17:17.800 --> 17:19.800 align:left position:10% line:5% size:80% Tell me how polling has changed. 17:19.800 --> 17:24.133 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% I'll get back to particular topics in the campaign, but 17:24.466 --> 17:26.500 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% as I understood it, 17:26.500 --> 17:29.500 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% because so few people have home phones anymore 17:29.800 --> 17:31.433 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% and most everybody's on cell 17:31.433 --> 17:33.500 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% and you can't get cell phone numbers. 17:33.500 --> 17:34.966 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% How are pollsters 17:34.966 --> 17:37.933 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% making sure that they're getting a representative sample 17:37.933 --> 17:39.800 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% the way they used to be able to do 17:39.800 --> 17:41.800 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% by looking up a person's phone number 17:41.800 --> 17:44.833 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% and seeing where they lived and maybe even looking up 17:44.833 --> 17:45.766 align:left position:30% line:89% size:60% voting record. 17:45.766 --> 17:47.666 align:left position:42.5% line:83% size:47.5% Well, one thing I would correct is 17:47.666 --> 17:51.433 align:left position:17.5% line:5% size:72.5% we can get a hold of cell phone numbers and we can buy. 17:51.433 --> 17:54.166 align:left position:17.5% line:5% size:72.5% There are huge databases of cell phone numbers. 17:54.166 --> 17:55.566 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% There are vendors who match 17:55.566 --> 17:58.633 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% cell phones to the voting files so we can get your cell phone. 17:58.966 --> 18:02.033 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% Although I hope in saying that we don't shut that down 18:02.033 --> 18:05.033 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% because the minute I avoid thinking because it's no way, 18:05.466 --> 18:08.466 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% that polling will survive, but we try to reach them. 18:08.466 --> 18:11.800 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% We still reach 20% on landlines. 18:12.433 --> 18:14.866 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% Mostly seniors and rural voters. 18:14.866 --> 18:16.600 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% We reach you, we try to reach you 18:16.600 --> 18:20.966 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% on your cell phone, we text you, and we also do online polling. 18:20.966 --> 18:24.466 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% So we're trying to reach you in multiple ways, multiple times, 18:24.700 --> 18:25.833 align:left position:30% line:89% size:60% multiple days. 18:25.833 --> 18:28.300 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% But it is hard to reach people. 18:28.300 --> 18:30.266 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% And the response rates have gone way down. 18:30.266 --> 18:32.700 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% And it always makes the pollsters on either 18:32.700 --> 18:34.333 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% side of the aisle very nervous. 18:34.333 --> 18:36.666 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% Yeah, I will say it's gotten, 18:36.666 --> 18:38.700 align:left position:17.5% line:5% size:72.5% I think, more interesting that we can reach people, 18:38.700 --> 18:41.700 align:left position:20% line:5% size:70% especially through text in various times of day. 18:42.333 --> 18:44.833 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% We used to, you know, only call during dinner time 18:44.833 --> 18:47.833 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% and get hung up on because for those reasons. 18:48.100 --> 18:49.400 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% But now we can reach out. 18:49.400 --> 18:50.466 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% And in different times of day, 18:50.466 --> 18:51.933 align:left position:40% line:83% size:50% people are on different schedules 18:51.933 --> 18:54.966 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% and I think Celinda and I probably both miss, 18:54.966 --> 18:56.200 align:left position:37.5% line:83% size:52.5% you know, some of the days of Covid 18:56.200 --> 18:58.633 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% when it was very easy to get people on the phone 18:58.633 --> 19:01.500 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% because everyone was a lot of people were home during the day 19:01.500 --> 19:03.900 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% and begging to talk to anybody, even pollsters. 19:05.266 --> 19:06.166 align:left position:30% line:89% size:60% Right, exactly. 19:06.466 --> 19:09.166 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% It was lonely spending all those months at home, wasn't it? 19:09.433 --> 19:13.033 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% Well, but what about, making sure, 19:13.033 --> 19:16.033 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% you know, you said you can buy, 19:16.033 --> 19:19.333 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% you can buy cell phone numbers, you can buy down to the zip 19:19.333 --> 19:21.133 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% code and get all kinds 19:21.133 --> 19:23.966 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% of voting information on the people you're calling. 19:23.966 --> 19:27.666 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% But how do you make sure, for example, that you're 19:27.666 --> 19:32.366 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% not oversampling one kind of voter versus another? 19:32.366 --> 19:33.300 align:left position:35% line:89% size:55% I ask this 19:33.300 --> 19:35.633 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% because I saw a poll most recently, 19:35.633 --> 19:38.200 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% and it was actually an online poll, 19:38.200 --> 19:40.533 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% and I wonder how much these polls are being used 19:40.533 --> 19:42.233 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% and how they're being used. 19:42.233 --> 19:46.166 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% But an online poll that was very that showed, 19:47.566 --> 19:50.100 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% Trump up way higher 19:50.100 --> 19:54.600 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% than he had been in any recent survey by Quinnipiac or 19:54.866 --> 19:56.533 align:left position:30% line:89% size:60% or Ipsos or, 19:56.533 --> 19:59.533 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% you know, Gallup or any of the established pollsters. 19:59.766 --> 20:03.733 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% So is there something going wrong with online polls 20:03.733 --> 20:06.066 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% or are they just getting people to respond 20:06.066 --> 20:10.133 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% and not seeing, what their proclivity is, 20:10.133 --> 20:11.300 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% politically speaking? 20:11.300 --> 20:14.666 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% It very much depends on how the online poll was conducted, 20:14.666 --> 20:19.833 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% which panel they used and how they collected the data. 20:20.833 --> 20:22.600 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% Often when we're using online 20:22.600 --> 20:27.366 align:left position:40% line:83% size:50% panels, it's a blend of opt-ins. 20:28.066 --> 20:31.233 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% And we're also sometimes blending it with texting 20:31.233 --> 20:34.233 align:left position:35% line:83% size:55% and calling and kind of whenever you're 20:34.566 --> 20:37.566 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% mixing your methods, you're probably getting a 20:37.900 --> 20:40.066 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% group of people from a bunch of different, 20:40.066 --> 20:42.666 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% different ways and kind of sampling 20:42.666 --> 20:44.966 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% from a bunch of different methods and evening out 20:44.966 --> 20:47.066 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% any problems with one particular method. 20:47.066 --> 20:51.133 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% And we have, we established strata and quotas like we 20:51.466 --> 20:52.900 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% estimate how many people will be 20:52.900 --> 20:55.500 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% African American, how many people will be women? 20:55.500 --> 20:57.900 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% And I would imagine that poll that you saw 20:57.900 --> 21:01.033 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% might have had majority men, for example. 21:01.033 --> 21:04.133 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% One of the things that really irritates us 21:04.133 --> 21:08.200 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% as pollsters is 85% of our polls are never public. 21:09.000 --> 21:12.133 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% And there are some very fine public polls, as you said. 21:12.133 --> 21:14.666 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% And there are some really sloppy ones. 21:14.666 --> 21:16.266 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% And that's why the averaging 21:16.266 --> 21:19.266 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% is a little bit of your safety against that. 21:19.533 --> 21:21.900 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% We also have to figure out what the turnout model is. 21:21.900 --> 21:22.866 align:left position:30% line:89% size:60% And in our firm 21:24.133 --> 21:26.866 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% we often estimate two different turnout models. 21:26.866 --> 21:29.633 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% What if we get a Harris surge? This is what the vote will be. 21:29.633 --> 21:31.066 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% What if we get a Trump surge? 21:31.066 --> 21:32.700 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% This is what the vote will be. 21:32.700 --> 21:34.266 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% What if it's a traditional electorate? 21:34.266 --> 21:36.166 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% So we're trying to understand 21:36.166 --> 21:39.966 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% and protect ourselves against deviation like that. 21:40.233 --> 21:41.733 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% And we stratified by region. 21:41.733 --> 21:44.066 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% We don't go in and get all of the interviews. 21:44.066 --> 21:47.033 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% In New York State for Manhattan, for example, we get it 21:47.033 --> 21:50.033 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% proportionate to the electorate that's in Manhattan. 21:50.033 --> 21:53.100 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% So we're trying very hard, but it is more difficult. 21:53.433 --> 21:56.700 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% And I think people bring a healthy skepticism to the polls. 21:57.066 --> 21:58.200 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% And that's a good thing. 21:58.200 --> 22:03.800 align:left position:17.5% line:5% size:72.5% Now, Harris, for example, is talking a lot about her 22:04.000 --> 22:07.300 align:left position:25% line:5% size:65% childcare, expanded childcare credits or 22:07.500 --> 22:10.966 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% tax credits for small businesses just starting out 22:12.166 --> 22:13.500 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% and day care. 22:13.500 --> 22:16.666 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% And are those issues, are those 22:16.666 --> 22:20.066 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% the kind of issues that do well with women or does? 22:20.066 --> 22:24.533 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% Is that translated by her followers and her supporters 22:24.533 --> 22:25.900 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% and would be followers 22:25.900 --> 22:29.633 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% and supporters into her improving the economy, 22:29.633 --> 22:33.733 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% the way Trump always talks about improving the economy overall? 22:33.933 --> 22:35.733 align:left position:35% line:83% size:55% Well, it's a big part of the economy, 22:35.733 --> 22:36.866 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% particularly for women, 22:36.866 --> 22:39.800 align:left position:10% line:5% size:80% and it's increasingly a big part of the economy for men. 22:40.066 --> 22:43.933 align:left position:10% line:5% size:80% And we had the funniest, married men focus group in Michigan, 22:44.633 --> 22:48.266 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% a while ago, where men said, “I'm a caregiver spouse. 22:48.266 --> 22:50.633 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% So I get my to-do list every Saturday.” 22:50.633 --> 22:51.466 align:left position:37.5% line:89% size:52.5% They do. 22:51.766 --> 22:54.566 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% And there's now men see that as, “Okay, I got a role 22:54.566 --> 22:56.366 align:left position:35% line:83% size:55% I got to go pick up after prescriptions 22:56.366 --> 22:57.633 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% for my mother-in-law. 22:57.633 --> 22:59.866 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% I got to go do this. I got to go. 22:59.866 --> 23:02.233 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% I got to cover half the day care of the kids sake. 23:02.233 --> 23:04.400 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% It's my turn to take, stay at home.” 23:04.400 --> 23:06.133 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% So, and I can tell you, as 23:06.133 --> 23:08.400 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% an employer, young men are negotiating 23:08.400 --> 23:11.533 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% this just as actively as young women are. 23:11.533 --> 23:13.300 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% So it's a caregiving. 23:13.300 --> 23:15.733 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% In cities they are. 23:15.733 --> 23:16.333 align:left position:42.5% line:89% size:47.5% Yeah. 23:16.733 --> 23:18.933 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% Actually, suburban men are pretty big on it. 23:18.933 --> 23:24.033 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% And, you know, even rural men are intergenerationally focused. 23:24.033 --> 23:26.666 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% So it's, you know, they don't do the same amount of work. 23:26.666 --> 23:29.666 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% I mean, one of the funniest questions out there is 23:29.666 --> 23:32.266 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% we asked men, “Do you do the same amount of 23:32.266 --> 23:35.400 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% caregiving in home, housework as your spouse?” 23:35.400 --> 23:36.533 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% And they said, “Absolutely, I do.” 23:36.533 --> 23:38.866 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% 50% of women are like, “Are you kidding? 23:38.866 --> 23:41.933 align:left position:30% line:89% size:60% 25% max.” Yeah. 23:43.033 --> 23:47.433 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% But, the other thing, though, that is really revealing here, 23:47.766 --> 23:51.166 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% if you ask who would be better on the economy, 23:51.533 --> 23:53.100 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% Donald Trump is ahead. 23:53.100 --> 23:56.000 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% Who would be better on bringing jobs to the United States? 23:56.000 --> 23:57.433 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% Donald Trump is ahead. 23:57.433 --> 24:00.766 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% If you ask who would be better on the economic well-being 24:00.766 --> 24:04.400 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% for you and your family, Harris is slightly ahead. 24:04.666 --> 24:07.433 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% If you would ask, who would be better on dealing 24:07.433 --> 24:10.500 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% with economics like health care costs? 24:10.500 --> 24:13.733 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% Harris is much better, so they each have their advantages 24:14.100 --> 24:16.233 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% in the economic dialogue. 24:16.233 --> 24:19.266 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% And one of the things that Harris is trying to fix, 24:19.266 --> 24:22.333 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% and I think she's doing it very ably, is that 24:22.333 --> 24:24.700 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% people just didn't know her very well. 24:24.700 --> 24:25.666 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% So they have no idea. 24:25.666 --> 24:28.700 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% They still dont. Right. 24:29.233 --> 24:32.300 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% So she's trying to fill in here is my agenda. 24:32.300 --> 24:33.833 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% It is a new agenda. 24:33.833 --> 24:36.066 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% It has the focus of my experience 24:36.066 --> 24:39.000 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% in life with small business and housing and caregiving. 24:39.000 --> 24:42.466 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% And she just, you know, working very hard in advertising 24:42.466 --> 24:46.700 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% and in every public appearance to get that information out. 24:46.933 --> 24:48.466 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% She was able to flip her, 24:48.466 --> 24:49.300 align:left position:35% line:89% size:55% I mean, her 24:49.566 --> 24:52.066 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% approval ratings or favorability ratings are underwater 24:52.066 --> 24:53.066 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% for a very long time. 24:53.066 --> 24:54.100 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% She was able to flip them. 24:54.100 --> 24:57.666 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% But that's partly why her image is still soft 24:57.666 --> 25:00.500 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% and why some of this electorate is still soft. 25:00.500 --> 25:02.433 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% But your point on, you know, the different. 25:02.433 --> 25:05.233 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% I find that interesting because, for example, 25:05.233 --> 25:08.100 align:left position:12.5% line:5% size:77.5% she's been much more explicit about what 25:08.100 --> 25:11.100 align:left position:15% line:5% size:75% she's going to do with the tax code, whereas, you know, 25:12.300 --> 25:15.266 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% Trump was questioned at the New York Economic Club 25:15.266 --> 25:17.466 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% some weeks ago, asked about how he'd, 25:17.466 --> 25:19.966 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% you know, what he'd do with child care, how he'd pay for it. 25:19.966 --> 25:23.533 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% And he rambled off and started talking about tariffs, which, 25:25.000 --> 25:28.733 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% you know, a lot of economists believe would kill the economy 25:28.733 --> 25:31.900 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% if he raised, it would be very inflationary 25:31.900 --> 25:35.033 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% if he raised tariffs the way he's planning to. 25:35.033 --> 25:37.000 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% So your thoughts on that, Amanda? 25:37.000 --> 25:39.966 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% I think for Trump, there's more of a track record 25:40.166 --> 25:41.166 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% that he can point to. 25:41.166 --> 25:44.233 align:left position:35% line:5% size:55% And people remember how they felt 25:44.233 --> 25:47.233 align:left position:10% line:5% size:80% and how the economy was for them under Trump. 25:47.966 --> 25:50.700 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% You know, there's a little bit more of an actual 25:50.700 --> 25:55.000 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% gut feel for how they and their family were doing. 25:55.000 --> 25:56.666 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% But as Celinda was talking about in terms of, 25:56.666 --> 25:58.766 align:left position:37.5% line:83% size:52.5% you know, which economic measures 25:58.766 --> 26:01.966 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% Trump is kind of best on, you know, 26:01.966 --> 26:05.100 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% I think one of the things to remember is that the way 26:05.100 --> 26:08.566 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% men and women view the economy is also different. 26:08.833 --> 26:09.966 align:left position:40% line:89% size:50% How so? 26:09.966 --> 26:13.000 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% Men often look at the economy and how well the economy 26:13.000 --> 26:16.000 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% is doing by the incoming, 26:16.600 --> 26:19.833 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% the income for families, so the wages and jobs. 26:19.833 --> 26:21.266 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% And women are looking at it 26:21.266 --> 26:24.033 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% in terms of the outgoing expenditures. 26:24.033 --> 26:28.933 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% So inflation, and prices are really hitting for women. 26:29.266 --> 26:31.900 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% And so one of the things that you're really seeing is, 26:31.900 --> 26:35.166 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% an education or socioeconomic gap for women. 26:35.466 --> 26:38.300 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% So I don't think Trump is really going to be targeting 26:38.300 --> 26:41.600 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% winning over college educated women. 26:41.833 --> 26:42.866 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% Now, there are some spots 26:42.866 --> 26:44.966 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% where he'll be able to on a safety issue. 26:44.966 --> 26:45.866 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% And that's how Republicans 26:46.100 --> 26:49.433 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% were able to do so well in places like New York in 2022, 26:50.066 --> 26:53.266 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% but in places like Wisconsin and Michigan and Arizona, 26:53.266 --> 26:53.766 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% what he's going to be 26:54.433 --> 26:57.200 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% focusing on are kind of women without college degrees. 26:57.500 --> 26:58.733 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% And those are the women that, 26:58.733 --> 27:01.033 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% you know, over the last four years have had to decide 27:01.033 --> 27:05.300 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% whether to put gas in the car or food on the table at times. 27:05.300 --> 27:07.966 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% So that kind of economic stress 27:07.966 --> 27:10.966 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% has been really front and center for them. 27:11.333 --> 27:15.133 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% And they remember that under the Trump administration, 27:15.133 --> 27:18.133 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% they didn't have that kind of same economic stress. 27:18.500 --> 27:20.800 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% And that's really what he's focusing on. 27:20.800 --> 27:24.166 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% Thank you both for joining us, pollsters Celinda Lake 27:24.166 --> 27:27.266 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% and Amanda Iovino. That's it for this edition. 27:27.266 --> 27:30.400 align:left position:10% line:5% size:80% Keep the conversation going on all our social media 27:30.400 --> 27:33.833 align:left position:37.5% line:5% size:52.5% platforms and visit our website: 27:35.533 --> 27:38.533 align:left position:22.5% line:5% size:67.5% And whether you agree or think to the contrary, 27:38.733 --> 27:39.466 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% see you next week. 27:57.300 --> 28:00.866 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% Funding for “To the Contrary,” provided by: