Jaguar has revealed its Type 00 concept previewing next year’s production EV sedan.
The two-door GT made its debut at Miami Art Week having leaked online earlier in the day.
Take part in our poll to tell us whether you think Jaguar has got its new design right.
You might have heard that Jaguar has a new concept. Actually, that’s underselling it. Jaguar has a new everything. The automaker wants to reposition itself as a more expensive, more exclusive brand and has scrapped its entire existing model line and come up with a suite of new badges and logos.
New logos won’t save the company from oblivion, but Jaguar is hoping a trio of new cars might, and today we were introduced to a concept designed to shows us how they could look. The Type 00 is a two-door coupe that previews a four-door electric coupe we’ll see in production form at the back end of 2025 and on the street a few months later.
Two more cars will follow before 2030, all riffing on the same new design language. None will look anything like today’s Jaguars when you see them heading towards you. Type 00’s square face shows no evidence of the classic E-type oval grille or the boxier, mesh-filled version seen on more recent cars that can be traced back to the 1968 XJ.
The clean surfaces and lack of curves are both modern and modernist, recalling the minimalism of cutting edge 1930s and ’40s product design and architecture. But Jag’s designers couldn’t help but make a few nods to the company’s past masters.
Though you could hardly call it a retro design, the long-hood, short-deck proportions are ripped straight from the original E-type coupe’s blueprints. And the vertical panel between the fender and the 23-inch front wheel also comes from the same Jaguar icon. Fortunately the track width to body ratio is not borrowed from the E-type – the concept’s huge rims are pushed right out to the edges of its swollen arches, and then some.
It’s a brave, ambitious bit of design, no doubt, and not everyone will love it. So which camp are you in? Do you love or hate Jag’s new design direction? Take part in our poll and then drop a comment below to tell us what you like or loathe about the Type 00.
Vice President Kamala Harris has made a dent in former President Donald Trump’s lead among likely Iowa voters in the most recent Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll. (Photos by Win McNamee and Megan Varner/Getty Images, photo illustration via Canva)
Vice President Kamala Harris has taken a narrow lead over former President Donald Trump in the latest Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll published Saturday, just days before the Nov. 5 election.
The results are a surprising development for the state, which has been largely written off as an easy victory for Trump. He won Iowa in the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections. The latest Iowa Poll showed Harris leading with 47% of likely voters and Trump with 44%, the Register reported.
The poll, taken Oct. 28-31 by Selzer & Co. with responses from 808 likely Iowa voters, has a margin of error of plus or minus3.4 percentage points.
While Harris’ lead falls in the margin of error, it’s a significant reversal from previous Iowa Polls. In September, Trump led the Iowa Poll with 47% to Harris’ 43%. Trump had the support of 50% of likely Iowa voters in June when President Joe Biden was expected to become the Democratic presidential nominee.
Women, independents shift toward Harris
The largest shift heading toward support for Harris has been Iowa women – particularly women who identify as independent voters as well as those age 65 and older, the Register reported. More independent likely voters as a whole now support Harris at 46% to Trump at 39%, despite the demographic favoring Trump in every earlier Iowa Poll.
Independent women favored Harris in the September poll, with 40% supporting her and 35% supporting Trump. That lead grew in the latest poll to 57% of independent women who support Harris and 29% who support Trump.
More independent men still favor Trump over Harris at 47% to 37%.
While likely voters 65 and older also support Harris as a demographic, 63% of senior women support the vice president compared to 28% who support Trump – a more than 2-to-1 margin. More senior men also support Harris but by a margin of 2 percentage points at 47% to 45%.
Iowa Republicans have stumped for Trump in swing states
Iowa Republicans have spent time on the campaign trail touting Trump’s popularity in the state and the expectation that the former president will win Iowa for the third election in a row — U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst and U.S. Rep. Ashley Hinson, Iowa Republicans, have traveled to swing states like Pennsylvania and Georgia to rally voters in recent weeks, with Ernst saying Iowa was “in the bag” for Trump.
Though both Harris and Trump have spent most their time in key swing states ahead of the election, Iowa Democratic Party Chair Rita Hart told reporters Saturday that the poll results show that Iowa is a winnable state for Democrats in the upcoming election.
“We’ve been putting in the hard work, and it is paying off,” Hart said. “We’ve been educating our voters, recruiting volunteers, listening to friends’ and neighbors’ concerns, and we recognize that Iowans are looking for better leadership. The fact that Vice President Harris now leads Donald Trump in the latest Des Moines Register poll is obviously very exciting for us.”
Iowa GOP chair calls poll an ‘outlier’
But Iowa GOP Chair Jeff Kaufmann disputed the accuracy of the results, comparing the Des Moines Register’s poll results to one released by Emerson College earlier Saturday that showed Trump ahead at 53% to Harris at 43%.
“Des Moines Register is a clear outlier poll,” Kaufmann said in a statement. “Emerson College, released today, far more closely reflects the state of the actual Iowa electorate and does so with far more transparency in their methodology.”
House Minority Leader Jennifer Konfrst argued that the Iowa Poll well respected, and should not be dismissed just because it does not show favorable results for one party.
“I’ve been in their shoes on a Saturday night before Election Day, where the Iowa poll results come out, and they don’t look like what we’d like them to (be),” Konfrst said. “And they can’t believe Ann Seltzer, one of the gold standard pollsters in the country, in 2020 and not in 2024.”
The poll also found Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the independent presidential candidate who remains on the Iowa ballot despite ending his campaign, still has the support of 3% of likely voters. Libertarian presidential candidate Chase Oliver earned less than 1% in the poll. Another 1% of respondents said they would vote for someone else, 3% responded that they were not sure who to support and 2% said they did not want to disclose who they supported.
Though the poll showed Harris in a favorable position for Tuesday, Hart said it was important to note that Iowa Poll results are not Election Day results. Konfrst said the poll is a welcome push giving “energy and enthusiasm and momentum” to Democratic voters and organizers leading up to Tuesday.
“We have three more days before this election, so remember, this is just a poll, and what really matters is that Iowans show up and make their voices heard,” Hart said.
Democrats say poll supports argument for more national help
In the final days before the election, Konfrst said that she and other Democrats are having conversations about the poll with the national party and supporting Democratic organizations, hoping to get support and surrogate visits ahead of Election Day.
“We’re going to be asking as many folks as we can to be surrogates here, but at the end of the day, we know that it’s the hard work of volunteers, our candidates up and down the ballot, the Congressional candidates and the party and all of our partners here in Iowa who are doing that hard work,” Konfrst said. “And so, surrogate or not, we think that we’re going to have a better night than expected for Kamala Harris and Democrats on Tuesday.”
Hart also said that Iowa’s decision in the 2024 presidential election could have major implications for the future of the Iowa Democratic caucuses. Iowa was ousted from its first-in-the-nation seat in the 2024 Democratic presidential nominating cycle and released its mail-in caucus results on Super Tuesday supporting Biden this year. The nominating calendar will be up for discussion again heading into 2028, and Hart said Nov. 5 results will have a crucial impact on Iowa Democrats’ argument to return to return as an early state in future elections.
“Once this election is over, we’re going to be having this conversation,” Hart said. “And the better we do here in November, the better case we can make. … The bottom line is that I hope this shows the rest of the country that Iowa is a good barometer for choosing good leadership.”
Iowa Capital Dispatch is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Iowa Capital Dispatch maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Kathie Obradovich for questions: info@iowacapitaldispatch.com. Follow Iowa Capital Dispatch on Facebook and X.
Before it thinks about a third model, Scout first has to ensure the Traveler and Terra are a success.
The original International Harvester Scout was sold as a two-door convertible.
The head of product marketing at Scout indicated there may be interested in a smaller model.
Production of the Scout Traveler and Terra isn’t set to kick off until 2027, but the VW Group is already casting an eye toward what might launch next. According to some reports, a two-door off-roader is on the table, aimed squarely at the likes of the Jeep Wrangler and Ford Bronco. A tempting proposition? Or would Scout be better off carving its own path rather than trying to muscle into a market already dominated by some heavy-hitters?
At the unveiling of the two production-intent concepts in Nashville, Scout showed attendees a slideshow about its future plans. On one of these slides included side profile shots of the Traveler and Terra, as well as a mystery third model. Most of this model was covered in a bright orange cover, but some details are still visible.
It appears as though this model sits on slightly larger wheels and tires than the Traveler and Terra. It also has an even shorter front overhang than the brand’s first two models and looks to offer slightly more ground clearance. The Autopian, which shared the slide, suggests that this third model may also be shorter than the Traveler SUV, perhaps indicating that it could be a two-door with a convertible roof.
A model like this with the Scout badge wouldn’t be without historical precedent. The original Scout built by International Harvester had two doors, and several models were offered with removable roofs, including a retractable soft-top known as the ‘Sportop.’ If Scout is aiming to evoke nostalgia with a modern twist, a two-door convertible could be just the ticket.
When asked about Scout’s decision to launch the two models with a hardtop and an optional ‘Cabana’ style roof, Shaheen Karimian, the head of product marketing, hinted that there might be a niche audience craving a fully open-top experience in a more compact package. Karimian suggested that while the current lineup caters to practicality, there’s a potential market—albeit a small one—that would appreciate a true open-air option.
“How can we provide an open air feeling with the maximum amount of benefit, with the least amount of compromise? We landed at the cabana roof and glass roof options,” he told The Autopian. “On a two-row vehicle of this size, to deliver on all the other customer needs, the removable panels would be large, heavy, and challenging to provide a high quality experience without creating a higher customer price or an impacted vehicle experience.”
“It is true a smaller subset of customers are saying they want that removable roof experience… Doesn’t mean we can’t do one in the future, on say a vehicle with fewer doors and a shorter wheelbase,” Karimian added.
Of course, the future of a third model from the Scout brand will rest on the popularity of the Traveler and Terra. Scout also needs to get these two models into production and into the hands of customers before it can get too ahead of itself and start investing heavily in future products.
So, what do you think Scout’s next model should be? Cast your vote in the poll below and see where the crowd stands on Scout’s next move.
The latest Marquette Law School poll released Wednesday found that the race between Vice President Harris and former President Donald Trump remains extremely close in Wisconsin.
Harris received 50% of support among likely voters, while Trump received 49%. The previous Marquette poll, conducted in late September, found that Harris received 52% of support and Trump received 48% among likely voters.
The poll, which was conducted between Oct. 16 and 24, surveyed 834 Wisconsin registered voters of whom 753 are considered likely to vote based on 2016 voting records.
Charles Franklin, Marquette Law School Poll director
“The race has tightened a little bit,” Charles Franklin, the director of the Marquette Law School poll, said in a public forum where he presented the poll results Wednesday.
When third party candidates including Robert F. Kennedy and Jill Stein were included in the poll, Harris received 46% of support while Trump received 44% of support. Franklin said voters who are undecided and leaning toward voting for a third-party contribute to the uncertainty in this election.
“They could so easily tip the scales one way or the other,” Franklin said. “If I haven’t made it clear by now, it should not surprise anyone if Donald Trump wins, and it should not surprise anyone if Kamala Harris wins. The polling averages for the state… are just so close that polling is not going to help us at all to have confidence in who is the likely winner.”
The poll also found a large gender gap among voters with men favoring Trump 56% to 44% and women favoring Harris 57% to 43%.
Enthusiasm is also high with 66% of those polled saying they are very enthusiastic. Democrats had a slight enthusiasm advantage with 75% of Democrats saying they are “very enthusiastic” to vote compared with 66% of Republicans.
In the Wisconsin U.S. Senate race, Democratic U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin, who is running for her third term in office, polls slightly ahead of Republican Eric Hovde, a banker from California.
Among likely voters Baldwin received 51% of support while Hovde received 49%. The results are a big change from the last poll in September, which found that Baldwin had a lead of 7 percentage points over Hovde.
Baldwin was seen favorably by 45% of poll respondents, while her unfavorable rating was 50%; 5% said they haven’t heard enough to form an opinion. Hovde was seen as favorable by 36% and unfavorable by 48% of those polled, with 15% saying they haven’t heard enough.
U.S. flags fly outside FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C. The FBI’s latest national crime report, released in late September, shows an overall 3% decline in violent crime in 2023 compared with the previous year. Property crime also was down nationwide, dropping by 2.4% in 2023 compared with the previous year. (Mark Wilson | Getty Images)
Violent crime and property crime in the United States dropped in 2023, continuing a downward trend following higher rates of crime during the pandemic, according to the FBI’s latest national crime report.
Murders and intentional manslaughter, known as non-negligent manslaughter, fell by 11.6% from 2022. Property crime dropped by 2.4%.
Overall, FBI data shows that violent crime fell by 3%.
Violent crime has become a major issue in the 2024 presidential race, with former President Donald Trump claiming that crime has been “through the roof” under the Biden administration.
On the campaign trail, Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, has cited findings from a different source — the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Crime Victimization Survey — to argue that crime is out of control.
While the FBI’s data reflects only crimes reported to the police, the victimization survey is based on interviews conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau and includes both reported and unreported crimes. Interviewees are asked whether they reported the crime to the police. But the survey does not include murder data and only tracks crimes against individuals aged 12 and older.
The victimization survey, released in mid-September, shows that the violent crime victimization rate rose from 16.4 per 1,000 people in 2020 to 22.5 per 1,000 in 2023. The report also notes that the 2023 rate is statistically similar to the rate in 2019, when Trump was in office.
Many crime data experts consider both sources trustworthy. But the agencies track different trends, measure crimes differently and collect data over varying time frames. Unlike the victimization survey, the FBI’s data is largely based on calls for service or police reports. Still, most crimes go unreported, which means the FBI’s data is neither entirely accurate nor complete.
The victimization surveys released throughout the peak years of the pandemic were particularly difficult to conduct, which is a key reason why, according to some experts, the FBI and the survey may show different trends.
As a result, these differences, which are often unknown or misunderstood, make it easier for anyone — including politicians — to manipulate findings to support their agendas.
Political candidates at the national, state and local levels on both sides of the aisle have used crime statistics in their campaigns this year, with some taking credit for promising trends and others using different numbers to flog their opponents. But it’s difficult to draw definitive conclusions about crime trends or attribute them to specific policies.
“There’s never any single reason why crime trends move one way or another,” said Ames Grawert, a crime data expert and senior counsel for the Brennan Center for Justice’s justice program. The Brennan Center is a left-leaning law and policy group.
“When an answer is presented that maybe makes intuitive sense or a certain political persuasion, it’s all too natural to jump to that answer. The problem is that that is just not how crime works,” Grawert told Stateline.
At an August rally in Philadelphia, the Democratic vice presidential candidate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, said: “Violent crime was up under Donald Trump. That’s not even counting the crimes he committed.”
During Trump’s first three years in office, the violent crime rate per 100,000 people actually decreased each year, according to the FBI, from 376.5 in 2017, to 370.8 in 2018, to 364.4 in 2019.
It wasn’t until 2020 that the rate surged to 386.3, the highest under Trump, which is when the country experienced the largest one-year increase in murders.
We live in a world of sound bites, and people aren't taking the time to digest information and fact check. The onus is on the voter.
– Alex Piquero, criminology professor at the University of Miami and former director of the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics
Walz’s comments overlook the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the social upheaval following George Floyd’s murder by a Minneapolis police officer in 2020. And despite the increase that year, the violent crime rate in Trump’s final year remained slightly lower than in the last year of President Barack Obama’s administration. In 2016, the rate was 386.8 per 100,000 people.
Following the release of the FBI’s annual crime report last month, U.S. Rep. Dan Bishop, a Republican running for attorney general in North Carolina, shared and later deleted a retweet on X that falsely claimed the FBI’s data showed zero homicides in Los Angeles and New Orleans last year. In fact, FBI data showed that the Los Angeles Police Department reported 325 homicides, while New Orleans police reported 198 in 2023.
Voters worry
Crime has emerged as a top issue on voters’ minds.
A Gallup poll conducted in March found that nearly 80% of Americans worry about crime and violence “a great deal” or “a fair amount,” ranking it above concerns such as the economy and illegal immigration. In another Gallup poll conducted late last year, 63% of respondents described crime in the U.S. as either extremely or very serious — the highest percentage since Gallup began asking the question in 2000.
Crime data usually lags by at least a year, depending on the agency or organization gathering and analyzing the statistics. But the lack of accurate, real-time crime data from official sources, such as federal or state agencies, may leave some voters vulnerable to political manipulation, according to some crime and voter behavior experts.
There are at least three trackers collecting and analyzing national and local crime data that aim to close the gap in real-time reporting. Developed by the Council on Criminal Justice, data consulting firm AH Datalytics and NORC at the University of Chicago, these trackers all show a similar trend of declining crime rates.
“We live in a world of sound bites, and people aren’t taking the time to digest information and fact check,” Alex Piquero, a criminology professor at the University of Miami and former director of the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics, said in an interview with Stateline. “The onus is on the voter.”
Crime trends and limitations
In 2020, when shutdowns in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic kept people at home, homicides surged by nearly 30% — the largest single-year increase since the FBI began tracking crime.
In 2022, violent crime had fallen back to near pre-pandemic levels, and the FBI data showed a continued decline last year. The rate of violent crime dropped from about 377 incidents per 100,000 people in 2022, to around 364 per 100,000 in 2023, slightly below the 2019 rate.
The largest cities, those with populations of at least 1 million, saw the biggest drop in violent crime — nearly 7% — while cities with populations between 250,000 and 500,000 saw a slight 0.3% increase.
Rape incidents decreased by more than 9% and aggravated assault by nearly 3%. Burglary and larceny-theft decreased by 8% and 4%, respectively.
Motor vehicle theft, however, rose by 12% in 2023 compared with 2022, the highest rate of car theft since 2007, with 319 thefts per 100,000 people.
Although national data suggests an overall major decrease in crime across the country, some crime-data experts caution that that isn’t necessarily the case in individual cities and neighborhoods.
“It can be sort of simplistic to look at national trends. You have to allow the space for nuance and context about what’s happening at the local level too,” said Grawert, of the Brennan Center.
Some crime experts and politicians have criticized the FBI’s latest report, pointing out that not all law enforcement agencies have submitted their crime statistics.
The FBI is transitioning participating agencies to a new reporting system called the National Incident-Based Reporting System or NIBRS. The FBI mandated that the transition, which began in the late 1980s, be completed by 2021. This requirement resulted in a significant drop in agency participation for that year’s report because some law enforcement agencies couldn’t meet the deadline.
In 2022, the FBI relaxed the requirement, allowing agencies to use both the new and older reporting systems. Since the 2021 mandate, more law enforcement agencies have transitioned to the new reporting system.
Reporting crime data to the FBI is voluntary, and some departments may submit only a few months’ worth of data.
Although the FBI’s latest report covers 94% of the U.S. population, only 73% of all law enforcement agencies participated, using either reporting system, according to Stateline’s analysis of the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting program participation data. This means that 5,926 agencies, or 27%, did not report any data to the FBI.
The majority of the missing agencies are likely smaller rural departments that don’t participate due to limited resources and staff, according to some crime data experts.
But participation in the FBI’s crime reporting program has steadily increased over time, particularly after the drop in 2021. Many of the law enforcement agencies in the country’s largest cities submitted data for 2023, and every city agency serving a population of 1 million or more provided a full year of data, according to the FBI’s report.
Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org. Follow Stateline on Facebook and X.
Incumbent Democratic U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin holds a commanding lead over Republican businessman Eric Hovde in Wisconsin’s U.S. Senate race, according to a new Wisconsin Watch poll conducted by The MassINC Polling Group and released on Monday.
Baldwin led Hovde 52% to 44% among 800 likely voters. That’s outside the survey’s margin of error of +/-3.8% and is her largest lead in recent polling of the battleground state. Only 2% of respondents said they were undecided.
The poll was conducted Sept. 12-18 by The MassINC Polling Group on behalf of Wisconsin Watch. Voters were reached via text message invitation to an online survey and by live telephone interviewers calling landline and cell phones. It was funded by a grant from the Knight Election Hub.
Baldwin has had the advantage consistently in a recent round of polls of Wisconsin. An Emerson College poll recently found her at 49% among likely voters and Hovde at 46%. The senator received 51% support compared with Hovde’s 48% in a Marist College poll, and Baldwin got 51% to Hovde’s 47% in a Quinnipiac University survey. In the most recent Marquette University Law School poll — the most closely watched poll in Wisconsin — Baldwin had 52% support among likely voters while Hovde received 47%. A Morning Consult poll has Baldwin leading Hovde 50% to 43%.
“Certainly you’d rather be in (Baldwin’s) position, given where the race is,” said Steve Koczela, president of The MassINC Polling Group. “She’s doing well among independents, and both her and Kamala Harris are actually drawing a few Republicans.”
The poll found Baldwin getting support from 12% of Republicans and 54% of independent voters. In comparison, Hovde had the backing of 39% of independents and just 2% of Democrats.
But, Koczela cautioned, “just because someone’s lead is outside the margin of error doesn’t definitely mean that they’re going to win.”
The MassINC Polling Group’s polling operation is rated 2.8 out of 3 stars by poll aggregator FiveThirtyEight, ranking it among the top 20 most reliable polls in the country.
Baldwin also had a significant lead over Hovde among women (54% to 39%) and was neck and neck with Hovde among men (47% to 50%), the poll found. Baldwin has the advantage over Hovde among voters in all age groups: 18- to 29-year-olds (50% to 45%), 30- to 44-year-olds (58% to 37%), 45- to 59-year-olds (53% to 43%) and 60 and older (50% to 47%).
Among voters without college degrees, 49% of respondents backed Hovde, and 47% backed Baldwin. But among voters with a bachelor’s degree or more, Baldwin led 63% to Hovde’s 33%.
The poll also found Baldwin performing well with voters of all income levels. Among respondents earning less than $50,000 annually, Baldwin received 50% support, and Hovde had 48%. Among voters earning between $50,000 and $100,000, Baldwin led 50% to 44%. She led 52% to 42% among voters earning $100,000 to $150,000 per year and 61% to 39% among respondents earning $150,000 or more annually.
Baldwin is also viewed favorably by substantially more voters than Hovde. Among those surveyed, the senator was viewed favorably by 51% and unfavorably by 43%. Hovde was viewed favorably by 40% of respondents and unfavorably by 51%.
Baldwin maintained an even larger advantage among women, 57% of whom viewed her favorably while 38% viewed her unfavorably. Only 35% of women viewed Hovde favorably while 55% viewed him unfavorably. Among men, 45% viewed Baldwin favorably while 49% viewed her unfavorably; 45% viewed Hovde favorably and 48% had an unfavorable view of him.
Hovde’s lagging favorability should be a concern for his campaign this close to the election, Koczela said.
“For other elections where both candidates have a 35% to 40% favorability rating, then you can both target so-called ‘double haters,’ where someone’s got to win the voters who turn out who don’t like either one,” Koczela explained. “But when you’re minus 11 and your opponent is plus (8), then that is definitely a problem.”
“It’s not a 100% guarantee that you’re going to lose that way,” Koczela continued. “There might be other reasons why someone would vote for you, but it’s definitely not the state that you would want.”
Baldwin and Hovde will have their sole debate on Oct. 18 at 7 p.m.
Toplines from the poll can be found here. Crosstabs from the poll can be found here.
Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.
A slight majority of Wisconsin voters want Democrats to control the state Legislature after the Nov. 5 election, according to a new Wisconsin Watch poll conducted by The MassINC Polling Group and released Monday.
The survey also found strong distrust of state government, with only 24% saying they think Wisconsin state government operates in an open and transparent way, 46% saying it doesn’t and 28% saying they’re unsure.
The survey of 800 likely voters found 51% of respondents would prefer if Democrats controlled the Legislature in January, while 44% prefer Republicans. The seven-point difference was almost outside the poll’s margin of error of +/-3.8%.
Notably, 48% of independent voters said they would prefer if Democrats controlled the statehouse while 42% of independents backed Republicans. Democrats had a significant lead among women, the poll found, 56% to 39%. Republicans had a small advantage among men, 50% to 45%.
The poll asked voters if they would “prefer to see Democrats or Republicans in control of the Wisconsin state legislature after the November elections?” It did not ask about specific races and candidates by name, noted Steve Koczela, president of The MassINC Polling Group.
But the pollsters did weight the results geographically based on expected turnout, Koczela said.
Respondents were also asked about the fairness of the state’s new legislative districts, which were implemented after the liberal majority Wisconsin Supreme Court threw out the state’s old, Republican-gerrymandered maps on a technicality. Those districts — and another similarly gerrymandered set of districts — heavily favored Republicans, helping the GOP maintain large majorities in the Legislature over the past decade.
The new maps were approved by the Republican-controlled Legislature and signed by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers. Analyses of the maps showed they could yield narrow Democratic majorities in the Assembly and state Senate in a November election with a strong showing for Democrats statewide, though only half of the Senate seats are up for election this year. Democrats are not expected to have a chance of winning the Senate until 2026.
Among those surveyed, 33% said they believed the new boundaries were more fair, 25% said they were less fair, 13% said they were about the same and 29% didn’t know. There was a sizable partisan split on the question of fairness, with 61% of Democratic respondents saying the new districts were more fair compared to just 9% of Republicans.
Among the issues that mattered the most to voters in determining their vote in legislative races, the economy and jobs led the way (60%). That was followed by the “future of our democracy” (58%), election integrity (52%), ending government gridlock (50%), and access to affordable health care (50%).
Once again there were meaningful differences depending upon party affiliation. Among Republicans, the economy and jobs (69%), election integrity (64%) and ending government gridlock (44%) were the top issues. For Democrats, abortion rights (79%), the future of democracy (76%) and access to affordable health care (73%) were most important.
Independent respondents prioritized the economy and jobs (61%), the future of democracy (58%), election integrity (51%) and ending government gridlock (51%).
The poll was conducted Sept. 12-18. Voters were reached via text message invitation to an online survey and by live telephone interviewers calling landline and cell phones. It was funded by a grant from the Knight Election Hub.
Toplines from the poll can be found here. Crosstabs from the poll can be found here.
Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.
Vice President Kamala Harris has grown her lead over former President Donald Trump in Wisconsin following their Sept. 10 debate, according to a new Wisconsin Watch poll conducted by The MassINC Polling Group and released on Monday.
Among 800 likely voters, Harris led Trump 53% to 46%, her largest lead in recent polling from this crucial swing state and nearly outside the survey’s +/-3.8% margin of error. In a multi-candidate race, Harris received 51% support to Trump’s 45%. Both independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — who has dropped out of the race and endorsed Trump — and Green Party candidate Jill Stein each received about 1% support.
The Wisconsin Watch poll comes amid a flurry of post-debate swing state polling in recent days — mostly showing a too-close-to-call race. The latest Marquette Law School Poll, the most closely watched poll in the state, showed Harris up four points over Trump, but it was conducted before the debate, which post-debate polls show Harris won.
Among post-debate polls, an Emerson College poll found Trump at 50% and Harris at 49% in Wisconsin; a Marist College poll found Harris at 50% and Trump at 49%; and a Quinnipiac University poll found Harris at 49% and Trump at 48% — all statistical ties. A Morning Consult poll found Harris ahead 50% to 44%, larger than but still within the margin of error.
“If the election were held today … we’d be expecting to find (Harris) with a low single-digit lead (in Wisconsin),” said Steve Koczela, president of The MassINC Polling Group. He said “if that’s true, then we should expect the polls to range from somewhere a few points above that to a few points below that” when asked if he was concerned the poll found Harris receiving more support than in other polls.
But, Koczela cautioned, “it’s always possible that surges in turnout or lagging turnout from one group or another could change the results from what the polls show.”
“We don’t have to look very far back in history to see where that happened in the state of Wisconsin,” he continued. “So, we do the best we can, and then we’re waiting for Election Day like everybody else.”
The MassINC Polling Group’s polling operation is rated 2.8 out of 3 stars by poll aggregator FiveThirtyEight, ranking it among the top 20 most reliable polls in the country. Harris leads Trump in Wisconsin by about 2%, according to FiveThirtyEight’s polling average for the state.
Harris was also viewed more favorably by voters than Trump: 49% view her favorably while 48% view her unfavorably. For the former president, 44% view him favorably and 53% view him unfavorably. That represents a small improvement for both candidates compared to Marquette’s pre-debate poll.
The poll was conducted Sept. 12-18 by The MassINC Polling Group on behalf of Wisconsin Watch. Voters were reached via text message invitation to an online survey and by live telephone interviewers calling landline and cell phones. It was funded by a grant from the Knight Election Hub.
Head-to-head comparisons
In other poll findings, 44% of voters said the phrase “knows how to manage the economy” best describes Trump, while 43% of voters said the same about Harris.
That’s notable, Koczela said, because the economy “is the top issue in the election cycle.”
“If you’re going to only have one attribute that you’re doing well on, that’s the one you’d want to have,” he said. “I think that’s part of how Donald Trump is keeping the election close.”
More voters polled believed Harris will do a better job keeping America safe — 49% said the phrase “will keep America safe” best describes the vice president; 44% of respondents said the same about Trump. That comes as Trump and his allies once again try to make public safety a centerpiece of the campaign, as they’ve done in other recent elections.
Harris’ advantage here — still within the margin of error — bucks historical trends, Koczela said.
“Historically, (you) would very often expect to see Republicans winning by a fairly wide margin,” he said in an interview with Wisconsin Watch. “That’s a great number for Harris, to have perhaps a slight edge, but even to be in the same ballpark, I think is a great number for a Democrat when being compared to a Republican.”
A majority of respondents said Harris is “a person of strong moral character” (53%) and “mentally sharp” (54%). Just 26% said Trump “is a person of strong moral character,” and only 35% of respondents said he is “mentally sharp.”
Respondents also said Harris was more relatable than Trump, 50% to 33%; will better follow the law, 53% to 34%; and expresses a positive view of the future of America, 54% to 41%.
The poll also found that 59% of likely voters believed Harris did a better job in the debate; just 21% of those surveyed said Trump did a better job in the debate.
However, more respondents said Trump “will bring real change to Washington” than Harris, 41% to 37%, while 16% of voters said neither candidate would bring real change.
Among respondents to the poll, 32% said they were Democrats, 36% said they were Republicans and 32% identified as independent.
What issues matter most to voters?
Voters were asked to name any number of their top issues in the presidential race. The five issues mentioned the most were jobs, wages and the economy (64%), the future of democracy in America (62%), immigration policy (57%), Social Security and Medicare (50%), and abortion rights (49%), according to the poll.
Among Democrats, the five most important issues are the future of American democracy (81%), abortion rights (79%), the U.S. Supreme Court (69%), the character of each candidate (69%), and health care policy (64%). For Republicans, it’s immigration policy (78%), jobs, wages and the economy (71%), the national debt (61%), the future of American democracy (47%), and foreign policy (43%).
For independent voters, jobs, wages and the economy (69%) are the most important issues. That’s followed by the future of American democracy (60%), immigration policy (57%), Social Security and Medicare (51%), and the national debt (51%). Abortion rights (46%) were a close sixth.
Among men, the economy was the most important issue (65%), followed by the future of American democracy (58%) and immigration policy (57%). For women, the future of American democracy (66%) was the most important issue. The economy (62%) was second, and abortion rights (57%) were third.
Generally, 76% of those polled said they felt like their rights are being threatened. Just 15% said their rights are being well protected. Eighty-two percent of Republicans said their rights are being threatened, while 12% said they are being protected. Among Democrats, 71% felt like their rights are being threatened, and 19% felt they are being protected.
“Both sides have really put it on the table,” Koczela said. “The threats that they’re describing for their voters and using to motivate their voters are quite different. But it does make sense that both parties would see that as a key issue.”
Women, in particular, felt like their rights are being threatened — 81% said as much in the poll, with only 11% of women reporting they feel like their rights are being well protected.
Toplines from the poll can be found here. Crosstabs from the poll can be found here.
Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.
Login
