The White House and Lobby ran with Harry Enten's talking point suggesting President Donald Trump has "100%" percent support among MAGA for the war, and, well Hell, everything.
I saw the talking point circulating as I checked the VERY FIRST interview conducted today. Below is what I posted on X. But unlike X, I added the entire PDF file of the interview for you to review. I had to redact the voter's name and other Personal Identifiable Information.
But suffice it to say there's a 100% chance that these 100% MAGA polls are straight up fake. FYI, I'm not exactly sure what the voter is referring to when he mentions the census, but whatever. Think his point is clear. He lives in Bucks County.
Observe...
As promised, and as you can see, this 33-year-old male Trump voter from Bucks County, PA was literally the FIRST VOTER to complete an interview, TODAY.
I've blacked out his name and other PII, short for "Personal Identifiable Information".
Also as you can see, these polls are "100%" full of shit. The probability of finding universal support or opposition, whatever agreement, among a subgroup this large, is ridiculous to even consider. It does NOT happen in this game.
You're being hoodwinked, but more on that. Let's get back to him.
He is clearly an upset voter, and in his transcribed response in Q17 makes it very clear that is due to the Iran War and the "America First" president being dominated and distracted by foreign policy.
Now, ofc he is not 80% of MAGA reflected, though again these "meant to show unity" numbers are a deception. MAGA has shrunken and changed since Nov. 24. It is SMALLER, OLDER AND WHITER than the day before the election.
Anyone claiming otherwise is intentionally gaslighting or doesn't know what the Hell they are doing, most likely the former at this point being the primary motivation.
War propaganda, including from public polls, is the hardest form of political propaganda to resist.
But my entire point in showing you this is to demonstrate how patently absurd and IMPROBABLE— almost to the point of IMPOSSIBLE—it is for a pollster to claim a subgroup as large as "party" or even "MAGA" to ever be "100%" in agreement.
A pollster group chat I'm in has been exchanging results like this and mocking the sheer lack of integrity displayed by people, all day today.
Meaning, it's so absurd, it's a joke.
This is like Quinnipiac in 2020 claiming Donald Trump had ZERO support among black voters, an even smaller subgroup that was large enough to make "100%" agreement, more than suspect.
There's no difference between that, and this. And I might be an asshole, admittedly, but I'm a consistent asshole with a serious disdain for intentionally trying to deceive and misrepresent the sovereign voters.
Speaking of which...
I'd just like to note in closing that I've witnessed a lot of disappointing behavior in this industry over these last few weeks, if not months. As it turns out, the right likes to gaslight each other and themselves with public polling just as much as leftists. I should've expected it.
But when the bodies of service members stop coming home in coffins, I'm going to bury more than a few guilty parties, myself. Ofc I always had the receipts, folks. Should've known better to think otherwise. Think I'll let them dig their own graves a little deeper, first.
Here's my interview with Matt Gaetz on the coming New Majority and the Young Americans who want to Burn It Down!
Matt's intro monologue absolutely NAILED it. Had to shoutout Gabe Guidarini
who CRUSHED the Foreword giving Generation Z a voice.
Burn It Down 🔥🔥🔥: https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Burn-It-Down/Rich-Baris/9798895658161
On "What Are The Odds?" with Baris and Baris on Monday, @RobertBarnes detailed four determining factors that have been predictive in midterms outcomes for the U.S. Senate.
"So on paper, the Senate should not be up for grabs. And when two of these four factors that I'll identify are not present in the Senate election in the midterms, then in fact eighty percent of the time the incumbent party does not lose four or more seats, and is often as likely to gain seats as it is to lose seats—when the map looks like this and when two of these four factors are not present."
Pre-Order Burn It Down 🔥🔥🔥: https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Burn-It-Down/Rich-Baris/9798895658161
The first copies arrived and we unboxed them!
It's now clear "Burn It Down: What The Polls Say Young Americans Really Want" by Rich Baris THE PEOPLE'S PUNDIT & Joshua Lisec has become THE central theme and must-read book of the 2026 #midterms, and that won't change anytime soon.
BIG DATA POLL has exclusive data from decades of trend-tracking and uncomfortable question-asking, and it all points to the same conclusion. Imminent systemic collapse is coming and we must choose: It's either MAGA or Mamdani!
Young people believe systems are rigged and the old order feeds itself at their expense. They don’t want to reform the system; they want to Burn It Down! 🔥 🔥 🔥 Pre-Order NOW https://amazon.com/dp/B0GV4PT4LB
Watch Live 3:00 PM EST — Robert Barnes and Rich Baris discuss in detail bombshell results within the Public Polling Project for Early Spring 2021, and more civil unrest amid the trial of Derek Chauvin for the death of George Floyd.
Support the Public Polling Project
https://www.bigdatapoll.com/public-polling-project/
Locals Communities
https://peoplespundit.locals.com/
https://vivabarneslaw.locals.com/
Like on Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/PeoplesPunditDaily
Follow on Twitter
https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit
https://twitter.com/Barnes_Law
Theme Song: "Highway" By Grammy Considered Bowen Band
https://www.chrisbowenband.com/
Hey guys,
Friendly reminder I'll be on the Auron MacIntyre Show at 3PM ET, which is about 10 minutes.
TTYS!
If John Sununu were to upset Chris Pappas, the 18 years between his tenures in the U.S. Senate would be the longest in 120 years, besting Thomas Platt, R-NY, who returned in March, 1897 after just under 16 years.
William Whyte, D-MD, returned to the U.S. Senate after just over 25 years in June, 1906.
Obviously neither were sent back to the U.S. Senate by voters, as this was Pre-17th Amendment. The only modern example is Dan Coats, R-IN, who decided not to seek reelection in 1998, then ran for his old seat again in 2010 when his successor Evan Bayh, D-IN, decided not to run again. Bayh was later recruited by Democrats again in 2016, thinking Hillary Clinton would win and they could potentially take back the seat with a more "moderate" voice who had name ID and held the office. He was soundly defeated.
That said, primary turnout again here in New Hampshire so far significantly favors Democrats. Though they had a slightly more competitive race, the GOP excuses are old.
They have a ...
Iowa has 31 pivot counties, the largest number found in any state nationwide. Pivot counties are defined as counties that voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, but swung or "pivoted" to Donald Trump in 2016. All 31 pivot counties in the Hawkeye State would go on to support President Trump later in 2020, despite swinging fairly hard against Republicans in 2018, and again in the 2024 Presidential Election.
In prior swing cycles, or thermostat cycles is probably the better term, we've seen Iowa swing harder to the left against Republicans than other states you might otherwise suspect would outpace it. But it makes more sense when you realize the pivot nature of the state, regardless of how white it is.
That's not to say that it will swing harder than say, Ohio, this time. It just wouldn't be unexpected given that nature, it's history, and the fact polling the state has proven rather tricky for much of the industry.
Looks like we'll have Ashley Hinson up ever so slightly over Josh ...
Watching people attempt to "unskew" polls conducted by all walks of this industry—ranging from Nate Cohn at The New York Times to Spencer Kimball at Emerson College to Tim Malloy at Quinnipiac—all to deny Donald Trump's gains against Joe Biden with various voting blocs, is more than a little sad.
The slew of recent polls over two weeks—to include no less than four today alone—have simply confirmed prior findings published from other pollsters who have previously been "unskewed". That includes your's truly and our work at BIG DATA POLL, Mark Penn at Harvard University, Patrick Ruffini at Echelon Insights, and many others.
I'm temped to equate this with an Occam's razor-like situation. But this debate is more about likelihood than simplicity.
Here's the Presidential Vote Preference Trend for Biden v. Trump going back to August 2020. The Public Polling Project did not begin asking the Rematch Question for 2024 until September 2021. However, we can still make some pretty important and interesting observations.