Author: Myra Miller

Myra Miller is Co-Founder of the Winston Group, a strategic planning and survey research firm in Washington, DC. She has worked with House and Senate Republican Leadership and Conferences for over a decade on strategic planning, communications and policy issues. She was closely involved in helping develop the successful House Republican leadership strategy and narrative for the 2010 elections. Recently she has worked on a variety of Congressional policy issues and bipartisan initiatives specifically dealing with governance, including Congressional reform, and improving political discourse. On behalf of the Congressional Institute, she has done research on women voters and has worked with Members of Congress on how to talk to women voters. Her experience also includes working with Fortune 100 corporations and associations on key policy issues including health care, medical innovation and tax policy, as well as brand reputation. She has advised center-right political parties throughout Europe, and has a Masters degree in International Studies from the University of Cambridge. Prior to joining the Winston Group, she served as Political Director for the Alabama Republican Party.
Posted on

The Electoral College Trigger

One of the questions we are asked the most is about why polls were wrong in the 2016 election that saw the “surprise” win for Trump. Polling averages had shown significant leads for Clinton, but the race tightened during October; polls not in the field toward the end missed the movement toward Trump, with the final popular vote margin being 2.1%. To some extent, many of the polls in the fall of 2016 weren’t wrong, as much as there was a lack of consideration for what can happen in the Electoral College when the margin is under 3%.

As we approach another close election, all scenarios should be considered if the current trajectory continues. Today’s Real Clear Politics average shows a Harris lead of 1.5% with 538’s average at 2.6%. Most of the political discussion is about Harris leading, but both of these polling averages are within the 3% range.

Looking back over previous presidential elections, the 3% margin is a trigger for the outcome to be determined by the Electoral College more than the popular vote. In cases where there was more than a 3% popular vote margin, the popular vote and the Electoral College vote agree. However, when the popular vote margin is 3% or less, the Electoral College comes into play as the determining factor.

The chart below shows the results of the 10 closest elections since 1856, sorted by the popular vote margin. Numbers in blue mean the result favored Democrats, and numbers in red favored Republicans. Highlighted rows denote elections where the Electoral College winner did not win the popular vote.

Starting with the 1856 election, which was the first contest between a Republican and Democrat, there have been 42 presidential elections. In that timeframe, there have been 10 elections in which the popular vote was 3% or less. Of those 10 elections, 4 were won by the candidate who did not win the popular vote: 1876, 1888, 2000, 2016.

If the current presidential polling margin continues to stay within the 3% window, there is the possibility that the popular vote winner could lose the Electoral College. Based on these historical trends, there is a 40% chance this could happen if the margin is 3% or less. This scenario should be considered as we get closer to the election.

Posted on

New Inflation Trending

This morning’s new inflation report showed a slight moderation in year-over-year inflation (2.5%) but with core inflation up 3.2% from a year ago. The year-over-year rate is the lowest since March 2021, the month that the American Rescue Plan was passed. But with inflation still well over 2%, this result seems to indicate there might be a smaller rate cut than Wall Street was hoping for, with markets initially dropping after the inflation news. While year-over-year inflation has moderated, prices are still not coming down. The Presidential Inflation Rate — the cumulative rate since the start of the Biden administration — remains over 20% (20.3%). The trend chart below shows the year-over-year rate (the red line) with the cumulative rate (Presidential Inflation Rate) in blue.

With the cumulative rate of inflation still over 20%, this means consumers are still not feeling relief. The cumulative rates of household expenses are still very high: food, 22.1%; gas, 45.8%; electricity, 30.7.%. The Harris campaign has pivoted from trying to sell good economic news as the Biden campaign had done with little success, to focusing on her plan to lower costs.

There is only one more inflation report (October 10) before the election, so the clock is running out on shaping the inflation narrative.

Posted on

The Value Of America’s Alliances

Last week was NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) week in Washington, as the alliance celebrated its 75th anniversary and welcomed the soon-to-be new Secretary General, former Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte. Alliances are receiving a heightened level of attention as they relate to the conflict in Ukraine. Former President Trump and others have indicated they are open to changes with our alliances and pressing allies to pay more for security. From our research for Winning the Issues (June 14-16, 1000 registered voters), we explored foreign policy topics and how voters perceive the value of our alliances.

Conflicting beliefs in foreign policy: Seven out of ten voters believe that peace, prosperity and security are products of American leadership and sacrifice (70-16 believe-do not believe) with this belief consistent across party (75-14 among Republicans, 65-20 among independents, 70-15 among Democrats). However, there is also concern that the US has become overstretched. Two- thirds of the electorate believes that the US is overstretched with funding and providing military weapons assistance for international conflicts. We must focus on rebuilding our country (63-21). Republicans (72-14) and conservative Republicans believe this (75-14) at a high level, but this is also the case among independents (63-20) and Democrats (53-28).

With majorities of the electorate believing both statements, this outlook indicates a conflict of foreign policy beliefs. For example, 60% of conservative Republicans believe both statements — that peace, prosperity and security are products of American leadership and sacrifice (79% believing) and that the US is overstretched (75% believing).

Importance of alliances: Alliances are seen as important (91-6 important-not important) but with a generational difference among Republicans on the scale of importance. Republicans over age 45 view the alliances that the US has with other countries as being very important (64%) rather than somewhat important (27%), while among Republicans 18-44, there is a much a larger percentage viewing them as only somewhat important (42%) rather than very important (49%).

Alliances as effective peace-keepers: Although alliances are seen as important, their value as effective peace-keepers is less clear. A majority of the country (54%) believes alliances like NATO have kept the peace since World War II (54-27 believe-do not believe). On this question, conservative Republicans are split 41-41, with Republicans overall (45-37) tending to believe this but with belief less than 50%. In contrast, Democrats (67-17) believe this more than Republicans (45-37) and independents (50-29).

NATO has helped keep the peace since World War II, but this current belief system indicates that it is time for a redefinition of the value proposition of our global alliances in the modern context.

Posted on

Deficit Claims From The Presidential Debate

Democrats are in full-scale panic after last week’s disastrous debate. Subsequent coverage has focused on the President’s performance, but today we are addressing one of the debate statements about the deficit.

In the debate, President Biden said: “He [Trump] had the largest national debt of any president in a four-your period, number one.” At the Office of Management and Budget’s historical tables page on the White House website, there is a file (table 1.1) that looks at the summary of receipts, outlays, and surpluses or deficits (-) from 1789 through 2029 (estimate). The OMB data shows a different picture. In Trump’s four years, the federal budget added 5.56 trillion dollars to the deficit. In Biden’s first three years, his budgets added 5.84 trillion.

Receipts in Biden’s first three years matched Trump’s four years, and the same comparison was true for spending. While Trump spent over 6 trillion dollars in 2020 to deal with COVID, each of the three prior years were under 4.5 trillion.

The difference between the two has been that Biden has normalized the COVID level of spending. In 2022 and 2023, he spent over 6 trillion, and the OMB estimate for 2024 increases to almost 7 trillion (6.9). In the projected four-year period estimated by OMB, President Biden’s federal budget deficits would reach 7.70 trillion dollars, which would be 2.14 trillion dollars larger than the four-year total for Trump’s presidency.

Posted on

Biden Underperforms Senate Candidates

Democrats are in full scale panic as polling nationally and in battleground states show the President in trouble, and in several cases, underperforming Congressional candidates. A new Wall Street Journal analysis shows Biden underperforming Senate candidates by 9 points. According to the WSJ, “What’s the opposite of presidential coattails? Presidential ankle weights? Whatever you call them, Joe Biden has them.”

This presidential underperformance of the Congressional level results from the negative image he has in contrast to his positive image in 2020. In 2020, Biden outperformed Congressional Democrats, while Trump underperformed at the Congressional level, resulting in Republicans picking up seats in the House despite a Trump loss. As shown in the chart, a few points difference between the presidential and Congressional levels made a significant impact in the election outcome.

  • Of several key voter groups, the most significant difference was among Hispanic voters with Biden winning by 33 but House Democrats only winning by 27.
  • Another notable difference was among college graduates (42% of the electorate) with Biden winning by a 12-point margin but House Democrats only winning by 7 — a 5-point difference between the presidential and House levels.
  • Among independents, Biden won by 13, but House Democrats only won by 9.
  • Among seniors, there was a 3-point difference between the presidential and House level, and a 1-point difference among women.

Biden’s slippage from 2020 to the present is most noticeable in his brand image, with every voter group in the chart shifting from positive to negative, especially among independents going from 51-45 fav-unfav in 2020 to 29-67 in most recent Winning the Issues survey.

Unlike the last Biden-Trump rematch, Democrats will have to adjust to the new campaign environment as their nominee creates a headwind rather than a tailwind at the Congressional level.

Posted on

Is Biden’s Blue Wall Collapsing Over Inflation?

Surveys show President Biden in deep trouble, but Democrats believe voters are disengaged and they have plenty of time to get their message out. Some are choosing to ignore surveys that show Biden behind, which is similar to Republicans that didn’t believe polls showing anything other than a Red Wave in 2022.

Democrats would be wise to heed the warning signs and take advantage of the time. Inflation is the central problem that haunts the Biden team nationally and in the states, and the White House hasn’t yet found a compelling economic message that voters believe. Our latest look at the presidential ranges shows the President having significant ground to make up. Ranges are based on the Real Clear Politics averages, removing outliers of the highest and lowest poll results for each candidate. This allows us to see the highs and lows for the candidates, and how much room to run each candidate has. As shown in the chart, Biden underperforms Trump nationally and in the Blue Wall States.

What Democrats see as Biden’s Blue Wall is the group of states (MI, PA, WI) that comprised Trump’s 2016 Rust Belt Coalition. Several traditional Democratic voter groups shifted toward Trump from 2012 to 2016, producing the “Rust Belt Surprise.”

Voters that were critical to Trump’s 2016 win were those who said the economy was “not so good.” According to the exit polls in 2012, 23% said economic conditions were excellent/good and 77% said not so good/poor. In 2016, it was 36% excellent/good – 62% not so good/poor. A key group were those voters who said the economy was “not so good.” In the 2012 election, this group made up 45% of the electorate, and Romney should have carried them. Instead, they went for President Obama by a 13-point margin of 42-55. In this election, they made up 41% of the electorate, and Trump carried them by 13 points at 53-40.

The results in the Rust Belt states displayed this shift on an even a larger scale. The largest shift was in Michigan where President Obama had previously won these voters by 18 points. In 2016, Trump won these voters by 26 points, a 44-point swing. It is not simply that he won these voters in this set of states after Romney had lost them; it was the magnitude of the results gained. With inflation being a top voting priority, the possibility is there for this to happen again.

Posted on

Three Things To Know About The New Inflation Report

This week’s new inflation report (3.4%) showed inflation not going in the wrong direction but not getting much better.

2.) Other household items have gone up significantly. Gas has increased over 50% since the beginning of his term (55.5%). Food is up 21.3% and electricity at 28.5%.

3.) The gap between wages and inflation has widened since last month. The cumulative inflation rate (19.9%) versus the cumulative increase in wages (14.1%) is 5.8%, compared to 5.2% in last month’s report.

After the new inflation numbers were released, the White House claimed that there were many inflationary factors in the economy in play when President Biden took office. Yet after the CARES Act was signed on March 27, 2020, inflation was less than 2% for 11 consecutive months, which extended into Biden’s term. In February 2021, it was at 1.7%. After President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan into law in March 2021, inflation jumped from 2.6% to 4.2% in April which started the current 37 month streak of inflation being over 3%.

Some Democratic strategists have advised the President to show more empathy on economic issues, but given the results of these inflation reports, voters are seeking relief from price increases rather than empathy alone. 

Posted on

Another Round Of Concerning Inflation News

This morning’s new inflation numbers confirm the trend we’ve been seeing the past couple of months, that inflation continues to hover well above 3%. Our trending chart shows year-over- year inflation coming in at 3.4% and with the new Presidential Inflation Rate ticking up to 19.9% — almost a 20% cumulative price increase since Biden took office. Today’s report means 11 months in a row of inflation staying at or above 3%. Additionally, it reflects that since December, prices have risen 2.6%. In contrast over the same time period, weekly wages have increased only 1%.

Earlier this week, prior to the new report, Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell indicated he is taking a wait-and-see approach: 

“We did not expect this to be a smooth road, but these were higher than I think anybody expected…We’re just going to have to see where the inflation data fall out.”

With the clock ticking down to the election, this is not the news the White House wants, nor is it where they expected to be at this point. This report complicates the Biden team’s economic narrative that the President’s policies are working.

Posted on

Afghanistan: The Watershed Moment For Biden Job Approval

In the leadup to Iran’s first-ever direct attack on Israel, President Biden said that US support for Israel was “iron clad.” But as Israel is ready to move forward to defeat Hamas in Rafah, the last stronghold of Hamas, the President is threatening to halt weapons shipments if they proceed. This announcement comes as US citizens are being held hostage.

Our latest numbers for Winning the Issues (April 27-29) showed that even before this week’s announcement, the president’s job approval on foreign policy (35-55 approve-disapprove) was struggling at the same scale as his overall job approval (38-55) and economic job approval (37-56). Disapproval with his handling of foreign policy is not limited to Republicans; independents disapprove of by more than 2:1 (26-63).

The impact of the administration’s decision may impede Israel’s ability to defeat Hamas, with parallels being drawn with the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021. From our trending of Biden job approval, the Afghanistan withdrawal was a watershed moment. As shown in the trend chart, this was the moment in which his job approval took a hit from which it has never recovered.

His job approval went from 52-40 in July 2021 — prior to the Afghanistan withdrawal — to 46-44 in September 2021. His job approval was declining prior to Afghanistan, but was still in positive territory. But from that point forward, his job approval deteriorated. Other factors like skyrocketing inflation locked in the disapproval in the months after that, with disapproval going over 50% in May 2022. However, the breaking point in his job approval can be traced back to Afghanistan.

Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu said, “If we need to stand alone, we will stand alone.” History will judge the impact of the administration’s decision, but it is likely to further embolden our adversaries and cause allies to question the depth of America’s resolve.

Posted on

The Age Of Emboldened Adversaries

On April 11, FBI Director Christopher Wray told the House Appropriations Committee: 

…We’ve seen the threat from foreign terrorists rise to a whole ‘nother level after October 7…Looking back over my career in law enforcement, I’d be hard pressed to think of a time where so many threats to our public safety and national security were so elevated all at once. 

Two days after Wray’s testimony, Iran made its first-ever direct attack on Israel. Iran has joined what some have termed an “unholy alliance” with Russia and China to support Russian President Vladimir Putin’s war against Ukraine and China’s expansionist policies across the globe.

Here at home, the anti-semitic, pro-Hamas protests in US universities are unlike anything we have seen in our country, as students are making explicit pro-terrorist statements and calling for annihilation of Israel and Jews. The situation at the US border grows more alarming as the numbers of unknown entrants, many from countries with terrorist ties, have been on the rise. These events abroad and at home indicate the US has entered a new era of emboldened adversaries.

Reflecting the FBI Director’s statement, voters are recognizing the increasing global threats we face. From a new survey for Winning the Issues (April 27-29, 1000 registered voters), a majority of voters (56%) believes that the US is facing the highest level of terrorist threats to public safety in decades (56-27 believe-do not believe). In terms of the campus protests we are seeing in universities like Columbia and Harvard, some have tried to dismiss their seriousness as comparable to campus protests of the 1960s. But our research shows that voters see the current protests as much more threatening to other students than protest movements of the past (47%), rather than similar to Vietnam War protests (40%).

Since the beginning of the year, we have seen an increase in the percentage of voters believing that America’s adversaries have been emboldened as a result of its standing in the world being weakened (55-19 believe-do not believe in late April, up from 51-25 in February). This belief system is not unique to Republicans who believe this by a very large margin (64-10), with 70% of conservative Republicans believing this. Independents (56-19) and a plurality of Democrats (45-28) also take this view.

This sense of weakened international standing goes back to the Biden administration’s disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan. The president’s job approval on foreign policy (35-55 approve-disapprove) struggles at the same scale as his overall job approval (38-55) and economic job approval (37-56). Disapproval with his handling of foreign policy is not isolated to Republicans; independents disapprove of his handling of foreign policy by more than 2:1 (26-63).

Events of recent months have demonstrated that the threats from Iran, China, Hamas and Russia are no longer isolated incidents; they are interconnected with global implications. Two-thirds of the electorate (67%) see the wars in Ukraine and Gaza as conflicts with global implications rather than isolated wars (23%), and this view is consistent across party.

In this new era of seeing old adversaries act in unprecedented ways, America must rise to the occasion.