New LA Times Poll Shows Democrats With Commanding Lead

There’s a new USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times Poll out today. Their polling method prompted a lot of skepticism during the 2016 election, and in the end it turned out to be too favorable toward Donald Trump. Still, they employed a unique approach that showed promise if they fixed some of the methodological mistakes they made. That makes it worth paying attention to:

Democrats had a 14-point margin, 55% to 41%, when likely voters were asked which party’s candidate they would cast a ballot for if the election were held now. If that advantage holds up until election day, just less than six weeks away, it would almost surely be large enough to sweep a Democratic majority into the House.

A 14-point margin in the generic congressional poll is huge. And yet, thanks to Republican gerrymandering, the Times is careful to say only that it would “almost surely” be enough to lead to a Democratic victory. I sure hope they’re just being ultra-cautious out there in their new digs in El Segundo. And check this out:

Women, who already leaned significantly toward the Democrats, have shifted further in their direction, widening a large gender gap. The poll found women now favor the Democrats by 28 percentage points, 62% to 34%, among likely voters.

Twenty-eight points! And this poll was “largely completed” before Brett Kavanaugh hit the news. If Republicans keep up their “fuck the women, we’re confirming Brett” attitude for much longer, I figure they’ll be down to a crazification factor 27 percent among women who are likely to vote. Hell, maybe even some of the crazy ones will defect.

UPDATE: I originally called the LAT poll “pretty accurate” in the 2016 race, which isn’t really true. It did predict a Trump win, but only by projecting a 3-point victory in the popular vote, which was off by nearly six points. I’ve changed the first paragraph of the post to reflect this.

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate