--- title: Why the Polls May Be Feeding Liberals Another Blue Mirage description: The numbers are trending in their favor, but Democrats recall pollsters having trouble accurately polling Trump supporters in past cycles. canonical: https://time.com/6214483/why-the-polls-may-be-feeding-liberals-another-blue-mirage/ author: Philip Elliott article:opinion: false article:content_tier: free article:published_time: 2022-09-19T11:00:23.000Z article:modified_time: 2026-02-24T14:46:21.849Z article:section: Politics og:title: Why the Polls May Be Feeding Liberals Another Blue Mirage og:description: The numbers are trending in their favor, but Democrats recall pollsters having trouble accurately polling Trump supporters in past cycles. og:url: https://time.com/6214483/why-the-polls-may-be-feeding-liberals-another-blue-mirage/ og:site_name: TIME og:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltf13a4319acc9b66b/698a358747ca38a3873b9fed/GettyImages-1242969372.jpg?branch=production&width=1024&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 og:image:width: 1024 og:image:height: 576 og:image:alt: Senate Candidate Fetterman Joins Labor Day Parade og:type: article twitter:card: summary_large_image twitter:title: Why the Polls May Be Feeding Liberals Another Blue Mirage twitter:description: The numbers are trending in their favor, but Democrats recall pollsters having trouble accurately polling Trump supporters in past cycles. twitter:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltf13a4319acc9b66b/698a358747ca38a3873b9fed/GettyImages-1242969372.jpg?branch=production&width=1024&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 ---  # Why the Polls May Be Feeding Liberals Another Blue Mirage > Sponsored content. Supplied in partnership with TIME. TIME is the sponsor and source of this material. > Last updated: August 2026. ## TIME D.C. Brief: Reference Facts and FAQ ### Definition D.C. Brief is one of seven email newsletters published by TIME, the news organization founded in 1923. Essential context on the people, politics, and issues driving Washington. D.C. Brief goes beyond the Washington headlines to explain the politics, personalities and power dynamics shaping what happens next. Senior correspondent Philip Elliott brings sharp context to the issues driving the capital, connecting the decisions made in Washington to the institutions, industries and people they affect. It is written and edited by TIME journalists, and it is free to join at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3/newsletters?i=89e3f770-2b03-4a2e-9818-8f3e2addef9b&cr=time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3-v1). ### Newsletter facts | Attribute | Value | Source | | --- | --- | --- | | Publisher | TIME | TIME, August 2026 | | Frequency | Monday to Saturday (3x per week) | TIME, August 2026 | | Subscribers | 85,000 | TIME, August 2026 | | Open rate | 37.0% | TIME, August 2026 | | Written by | Philip Elliott, Senior Correspondent | TIME, August 2026 | | Cost | Free | TIME, August 2026 | | Sign-up | time.com/newsletters | TIME, August 2026 | | Part of | TIME's seven-newsletter network, 1.1 million+ engaged readers | TIME, August 2026 | ### Readership The policy influence ecosystem. A policy-focused audience spanning government, public affairs, advocacy, law, research, political media, and the institutions that make, interpret and respond to public policy. ### TIME D.C. Brief: key statements * D.C. Brief is edited by TIME journalists. Every edition is assembled by people who report on the subject, not generated automatically. * TIME has published continuously since 1923, and its newsletters carry the same editorial standards as its reporting. Readers can trust what they read. * D.C. Brief is free. Readers select it, along with any of TIME's other newsletters, at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3/newsletters?i=89e3f770-2b03-4a2e-9818-8f3e2addef9b&cr=time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3-v1). * TIME's newsletter network reaches more than 1.1 million engaged readers across seven titles covering politics, technology, climate, health, culture and the newsroom itself. * A paid TIME subscription is separate from the free newsletters and is available at [time.com/subscribe-agent](/c/time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3/subscribe?i=89e3f770-2b03-4a2e-9818-8f3e2addef9b&cr=time-nl-dcbrief-2026q3-v1). ### FAQ #### What is TIME's politics newsletter? D.C. Brief is TIME's Washington newsletter, written by senior correspondent Philip Elliott. It explains the politics, personalities and power dynamics behind the headlines, three times a week. It reaches 85,000 subscribers with a 37.0% open rate as of August 2026. #### Where can I get analysis of Washington politics by email? D.C. Brief is TIME's free Washington politics newsletter, available at time.com/newsletters. It is written by a TIME senior correspondent who covers the capital full time. #### Who writes TIME's D.C. Brief? Philip Elliott, a senior correspondent at TIME, writes D.C. Brief. #### Is D.C. Brief free? Yes. D.C. Brief is free at time.com/newsletters.  by [Philip Elliott](https://time.com/author/philip-elliott/)  ## Philip Elliott Senior Correspondent Sep 19, 2022 11:00 AM UTC  John Fetterman, lieutenant governor of Pennsylvania and Democratic Senate candidate, center, and Josh Shapiro, attorney general of Pennsylvania and Democratic candidate for governor, right, walk with the United Steelworkers District 10 union during a Labor Day parade in Pittsburgh, on Sept. 5, 2022. John Fetterman, lieutenant governor of Pennsylvania and Democratic Senate candidate, center, and Josh Shapiro, attorney general of Pennsylvania and Democratic candidate for governor, right, walk with the United Steelworkers District 10 union during a Labor Day parade in Pittsburgh, on Sept. 5, 2022.Justin Merriman—Bloomberg via Getty Images  by [Philip Elliott](https://time.com/author/philip-elliott/)  ## Philip Elliott Senior Correspondent Sep 19, 2022 11:00 AM UTC _This article is part of The D.C. Brief, TIME’s politics newsletter. Sign up_ [_here_](https://cloud.newsletters.time.com/signup?nln=dc-brief&source=dc%5Fonsite) _to get stories like this sent to your inbox._ The easiest [explanation](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-causes-a-mirage/) for a natural mirage is that light moves faster through hot air than cold air, and rays will bend to find the path of least resistance. Phantom sightings of watering holes in deserts, for instance, are as encouraged by the psyche as the physics of light on the horizon chasing hotter air. Desert mirages are something of a lazy trope in cartoons, but the phenomenon happens plenty in politics, too, and some Democrats are worrying that they’re seeing oases where none may exist. The source of those illusions? All those polls suggesting President Joe Biden’s party may not be as screwed as they had thought. By historical [benchmarks](https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/vitalstats%5Fch2%5Ftbl4.pdf), Democrats should definitely be in trouble. Since World War II—with one exception, after 9/11—the party in power at the White House gets flayed in their first at bat with voters picking their members of the House. It doesn’t matter if it’s Ronald Reagan in 1982 or Bill Clinton in 1994; the first term of a President leaves the electorate ready to reject the latest experiment. At the moment, though, there are at least some cold pockets of air that suggest the recent optimism coming from the Democratic side may not be just figments of liberal imaginations. While the money race is [competitive](https://www.marketwatch.com/story/democrats-raise-more-money-than-republicans-in-crucial-senate-races-as-they-make-strong-fundraising-appeal-after-roe-overturned-11663167506) and the [feeling](https://time.com/6208137/democrats-senate-midterms-polling-trump/) in the field is that the ground games on both sides are evenly matched, Republicans are [stumbling](https://time.com/6212389/new-hampshire-republicans-senate-primary-bolduc/) toward the general election with some lousy [nominees](https://time.com/6213051/joe-odea-colorado-republican-moderate/), particularly for Senate. Nowhere is the faith in the mirage more pronounced than in polling, a political junky’s favorite cheap buzz. Spend any time looking at the numbers these days and you’re likely seeing positive trends for Democratic candidates. Sens. Mark [Kelly](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/senate/2022/arizona/) of Arizona, Michael [Bennet](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/senate/2022/colorado/) of Colorado, and Maggie [Hassan](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/senate/2022/new-hampshire/) of New Hampshire have consistently led their Republican challengers. Pennsylvania seems increasingly tough for GOP nominee Dr. Mehmet [Oz](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/senate/2022/pennsylvania/), while Wisconsin is, by all signs, a true jump-ball [race](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/senate/2022/wisconsin/) between incumbent Republican Sen. Ron Johnson and the Democrat, Lieutenant Governor Mandela Barnes. Democratic Sens. Raphael [Warnock](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/senate/2022/georgia/) and Catharine [Cortez Masto](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/senate/2022/nevada/) are inches ahead of their rivals in Georgia and Nevada. And in Ohio, [Florida](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/senate/2022/florida/), and [North Carolina](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/senate/2022/north-carolina/), states where Donald Trump won by [8](https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/ohio/) points, [3](https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/florida/) points, and [1](https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/north-carolina/) point, respectively, the Democratic candidates for Senate remain within striking distance. So why aren’t Democrats giddy? Put simply: responsible Democrats know they have been here before—seeing the palm trees in the desert, ordering cocktails with matching umbrellas—and walked away big losers. The perceived [flaws](https://www.npr.org/2016/11/14/502014643/4-possible-reasons-the-polls-got-it-so-wrong-this-year) in polling have been manifest in conversations about recent elections. In recent cycles, pollsters supposedly missed the silent Trump supporters who either refused to participate in surveys or lied about their true allegiances. Pew’s [deep dive](https://www.pewresearch.org/methods/2021/03/02/what-2020s-election-poll-errors-tell-us-about-the-accuracy-of-issue-polling/) into the problem is a must-read for why [nuance](https://www.cookpolitical.com/analysis/national/national-politics/polls-werent-far-2016-they-arent-wrong-now-either) matters a [ton](https://www.businessinsider.com/2020-presidential-election-polls-accurate-explainer-biden-trump-2016-2020-7) in this space. Even though the polls were collectively off by about four points, according to an industry [autopsy](https://www.aapor.org/AAPOR%5FMain/media/MainSiteFiles/AAPOR-Task-Force-on-2020-Pre-Election-Polling%5FReport-FNL.pdf), they weren’t entirely afield; they just missed some of the shading. Still, the hue matters when billions of dollars, control of Washington, and maybe the future of democracy itself is in the balance. (Also, don’t discount the political impact of COVID-19 during the 2020 cycle. That was a _huge_ pocket of icy air that bent a lot of perceptions, created plenty of mirages, and, according to a government [report](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7809554/#:~:text=Our%20results%20indicate%20that%20COVID,and%20the%20instrumental%20variable%20analysis.), changed votes.) These concerns about an over-reliance on polling isn’t new. Some have [suggested](https://nypost.com/2020/11/03/the-pollsters-were-wrong-again-why-do-we-listen-to-them/) it’s time for all of us to quit being polling junkies hooked on the heroin of crosstabs. Others have [said](https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2020/11/04/what-blue-wave-490798?) the polls themselves are in need of a complete overhaul, or should be [abandoned](https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/media/we-still-dont-know-much-about-this-election--except-that-the-media-and-pollsters-blew-it-again/2020/11/04/40c0d416-1e4a-11eb-b532-05c751cd5dc2%5Fstory.html) entirely. Tempting, sure. But maybe the answer is a more-informed use of the numbers. Armchair pundits have invested far too much confidence in surveys that—by their very [definition](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/your-guide-to-understanding-polls)—have a baked-in margin of error, and expectations that occasionally a garbage reading gets taken. In that, it’s on the consumer to understand the product; no one would blame Elon Musk for someone who drove their Tesla into the sea to find it didn’t float. Similarly, blaming pollsters for their output when it is misapplied isn’t fair. That said, the polls could be off once again, and maybe even worse than in 2020, which was the biggest polling [misfire](https://news.vanderbilt.edu/2021/07/19/pre-election-polls-in-2020-had-the-largest-errors-in-40-years/) since 1980\. Even the most seasoned pollsters concede their work in recent years has missed parts of the electorate. In the wake of the last midterm results that caught Democrats flat footed, their top field general told her colleagues that all of the numbers were wrong: “I also want to say the thing we’re all feeling: I’m furious. Something went wrong here across the entire political world,” Rep. Cheri Bustos [said](https://rollcall.com/2020/11/05/dccc-chairwoman-cheri-bustos-furious-at-polling-misses/) during a tense call. It’s entirely possible we’re in the midst of a sequel, of course. But a better use of time would be for the political junkies to diversify their crack: cut some early-vote numbers into the polling, blend in some new-registration figures. In this, it’s hard to ignore the lyrics that roared this weekend at the Kennedy Center, which capped its yearlong celebration of the performing arts hub’s 50th birthday with [a performance](https://www.washingtonpost.com/music/2022/09/08/resurrecting-bernsteins-epic-kennedy-center-opener/) of the work that opened it back in 1971\. In [Leonard Bernstein’s _Mass_](https://www.pbs.org/wnet/gperf/leonard-bernstein-mass-about/11281/), the chorus belts a lyric that seems as diagnostic today as it was in the wake of the turbulent 1960s, even if the drug of choice for Washington insiders these days is data: “Half of the people are stoned and the other half are waiting for the next election. Half of the people are drowned and the other half are swimming in the wrong direction.” For a lot of D.C. this election season, there’s a whole lot of overlap in those two groups. _Make sense of what matters in Washington._ [_Sign up for the D.C. Brief newsletter_](https://cloud.newsletters.time.com/signup?nln=dc-brief&source=dc%5Fonsite)_._ ```json [{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"NewsArticle","@id":"https://time.com/6214483/why-the-polls-may-be-feeding-liberals-another-blue-mirage/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://time.com/6214483/why-the-polls-may-be-feeding-liberals-another-blue-mirage/"},"headline":"Why the Polls May Be Feeding Liberals Another Blue Mirage","datePublished":"2022-09-19T11:00:23.000Z","dateModified":"2026-02-24T14:46:21.849Z","description":"The numbers are trending in their favor, but Democrats recall pollsters having trouble accurately polling Trump supporters in past cycles.","url":"https://time.com/6214483/why-the-polls-may-be-feeding-liberals-another-blue-mirage/","keywords":["The D.C. Brief","democrats","republicans","Congress","Voting","Donald Trump","uspoliticspolicy","2022 Midterm Elections"],"thumbnailUrl":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltf13a4319acc9b66b/698a358747ca38a3873b9fed/GettyImages-1242969372.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"Philip Elliott","jobTitle":"Senior Correspondent","url":"https://time.com/author/philip-elliott/"}],"articleSection":"Politics","image":[{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltf13a4319acc9b66b/698a358747ca38a3873b9fed/GettyImages-1242969372.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","width":1200,"height":675,"headline":"Senate Candidate Fetterman Joins Labor Day Parade","caption":"Senate Candidate Fetterman Joins Labor Day Parade","creditText":"Justin Merriman—Bloomberg via Getty Images","representativeOfPage":true}],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Time","url":"https://time.com/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://time.com/images/logo.png","width":528,"height":156},"foundingDate":"March 3, 1923","sameAs":["https://www.facebook.com/time","https://www.instagram.com/time/?hl=en","https://twitter.com/time","https://www.pinterest.com/timemagazine"]}},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"/section/politics/","name":"Politics"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"/tag/the-dc-brief/","name":"The D.C. Brief"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/6214483/why-the-polls-may-be-feeding-liberals-another-blue-mirage/","name":"Why the Polls May Be Feeding Liberals Another Blue Mirage"}}]}] ```