“I'm not sure there'd be a Times Siena poll in 2028 if the Republicans had won the Senate. That would have been the third systematic misfire overestimating Democrats out of the six elections we've done, on a scale that would have left readers feeling pretty misinformed. The costs of overestimating the Democrats would have greatly outweighed the risk of underestimating them. When you overestimate the side that wins, people don't care the same way.”

Well, I think that it's worth, to be honest, there are two separate worries. You know, one is like, what's the likeliest way the polls can err? And then the second one is what are the consequences if the polls err? You know, if the Republicans had won the Senate, and I didn't think that was going to happen, but if they did, like, I'm not sure there'd be a Time Sienna poll in 2028. That would have been the third systematic misfire and overestimating Democrats out of the six elections we've done and on a scale that would have left readers feeling like pretty misinformed about what's going to happen. And so, you know, the costs of overestimating the Democrats, if we had done so, would have greatly outweighed the risk of underestimating the Democrats, right? So even though I didn't really personally think that we were all that much likelier to underestimate Democrats than Republicans, like I do think that the risk that we overestimated Democrats weighed more heavily on me, given what the consequences of it would have been and what it would have meant for the way our work was perceived. You know, when you overestimate the side that wins, you know, I don't want to say that people don't care, but it's just not the same as if it seems…