At what point does bad polling cross the line from extreme professional incompetence to overt voter suppression?
A new Rutgers Eagleton polling report dropped on Wednesday, Save Jerseyans, showing Mikie Sherrill WAY out ahead of Jack Ciattarelli in the New Jersey gubernatorial contest. By 20-points.
Some historical context is helpful from the jump:
- Phil Murphy didn’t even beat Kim Guadagno by 20 points in 2017 (he won by 14 in ideal conditions for a Democrat). The largest gubernatorial landslide in recent memory transpired in 2013 when Chris Christie, at the height of his post-Sandy, pre-Bridgegate popularity, defeated then-State Senator Barbara Buono – who had been abandoned by the machine bosses – by 22-points. The worst Republican performance this century? 2001 when Jim McGreevey trounced Brett Schundler by 14.7-points.
- In May 2021, Rutgers Eagleton showed Jack Ciattarelli trailing Phil Murphy by 26 points. On the eve of Election Day 2021, it was 8 points. Jack ended up falling short when the dust settled by only 3-points.
- More recently, in October 2024, Rutgers Eagleton said Donald Trump was on track to lose the Garden State to Kamala Harris by 20 points. The final margin after the votes were counted? Less than 6 points.
In other words, Rutgers Eagleton sucks. Bad.
Even worse, in fact, than the now-defunct Monmouth Polling Institute which did the right thing and disbanded earlier; Monmouth actually did worse than Rutgers Eagleton in its final survey of 2021, reporting Ciattarelli behind by 11-points and missing by 8-points.
“At its height, the Institute played a prominent role in helping to elevate the University’s image and to amplify its reputation to households across the country,” the University President explained in a March 2025 statement. “However, the changing political and media landscapes have made it both more difficult and more expensive for polling organizations to operate.”
Said another way? Pollsters who can’t poll were making them look bad.
“In 2021, @MonmouthPoll screwed up @NJGov race polling so badly they got shut down,” opined Ciattarelli GC Chris Russell on x. “@EagletonPoll is worse & next. From sampling “adults” instead of registered or likely voters to a turnout model that is pure fantasy, this poll is a steaming pile of shit.”
Russell isn’t just complaining because a poll doesn’t say what he wants to see; he’s got specific examples:
Want more evidence of methodological malpractice? Page 10 of @EagletonPoll own cross tabs – unweighted data should NOT look like this. Respondents report voting 65-35 for Harris (actual 52-46) in ‘24 & 72-28 for Murphy (actual 51-48) in ‘21. Harris +30 & Murphy +44? Not serious. pic.twitter.com/lpFDmiT6Dv
— Chris Russell (@ChrisRussell_NJ) July 2, 2025
I’ll dumb this down a bit further for any idiots (or university pollsters, but I repeat myself) in the audience:
This survey showing Ciattarelli allegedly behind by 20 points relied upon a sample that’s 24-points more pro-Harris than the 2024 electorate and 41-points more pro-Murphy than the 2021 electorate. When your sample is THAT wildly off base, a decent pollster should question his or her work.
The list goes on from there but I hope the point is made? Right?
We’re all tired of biased polling from obviously biased Leftist colleges that are soooo out there in Left field that it’s tempting to conclude they’re trying to depress Republican voters and donors (which is exactly what happened, by the way, in 2021).
Go ahead and bookmark this post, folks. I welcome the scrutiny. If Jack Ciattarelli gets blown out by 20 or more points this November? I’ll print this out and eat it on Facebook Live.
But if he doesn’t? Rutgers Eagleton should do the right thing, admit that it’s a sham institution, and close shop like Monmouth did.
