Opinion : The Iowa Poll Drama: A Lesson in Expectations and Litigation

In the world of politics, there are three certainties: campaign ads, election day surprises, and lawsuits. The latest legal tussle comes courtesy of the Des Moines Register and its Iowa Poll, which has managed to anger people across the spectrum.

Here's the scoop: The Iowa Poll, published three days before the 2024 election, predicted that Vice President Kamala Harris was ahead of President-elect Donald Trump by three percentage points in Iowa. Fast forward to election night, and Trump won the state handily, taking 56% of the vote to Harris's 43%. That's not just missing the mark-it's tripping over it and landing face-first in a cornfield.

The fallout has been swift. First, Trump filed a lawsuit in December, claiming the poll was "fake news." Color me shocked, Trump sued someone? I think that falls under free speech.

Now, a group called the Center for American Rights has joined the fray, suing on behalf of Register subscribers who feel duped. They allege that the poll wasn't just wrong but recklessly published without proper checks, calling it a violation of trust and even suggesting it falls under consumer fraud. Now again, this falls under the, "think for yourself" category. Just because the news media says something, well, verify it.

If the Register loses on that case, look at every scammer out there.

The lawsuit, filed in Polk County District Court, accuses the Register of ignoring glaring issues in their data. Their argument? The results should have set off so many "red flags" that the newsroom looked like an antifa demonstration. Instead, they claim that the Register hit "publish" faster than anyone could say "margin of error."

Daniel Suhr, president of the Center, didn't mince words, saying, "Polling should inform the public, not mislead them." He argues that the Register owes its subscribers better-especially those who relied on the poll for insight into a high-stakes election.

I mean, to be fair, what side do you expect the Register to take? It's a leaning so far left publication that for those not left leaning, we just assume that's what their "polls" would say.

The Register is dismissing the lawsuits as frivolous and even dangerous. Their legal counsel argues that publishing polls, accurate or not, falls squarely under First Amendment protections. I'd agree.

So, who's right?

From the plaintiffs' perspective, the poll feels like more than just a bad guess. After all, the public relies on polls for insight, and bad data can shape perceptions in ways that are hard to undo.

On the other hand, defending the accuracy of a poll isn't the same as defending the right to publish it. Polls are snapshots in time, not crystal balls, and errors happen-even to seasoned pollsters...if indeed it was an error, which I suspect in this case might have been more wishful thinking. The real question might be whether a mistake, no matter how glaring, warrants litigation.

At the heart of the matter is trust. But silencing pollsters through legal challenges risks turning every polling error into a courtroom spectacle.

For now, the lawsuits offer a cautionary tale about expectations. Polls aren't gospel, and treating them as such only leads to disappointment-or, apparently, lawsuits. Whether the courts decide this was reckless reporting or just a misstep remains to be seen.

In the meantime, let's all take a deep breath and remember: predicting elections is hard. Especially when emotions are involved, which has to be the only explanation for getting it so wrong.

I mean, I'd never answer the phone and tell the pollsters the opposite of what I think...mostly because I've never been polled. If I did get a call asking, first I'd think, "It's none of your business," and secondly, "Let's have some fun."

So anyway, the numbers were in and then the real numbers came in. I hope we've learned to not listen to polling numbers to decide what we think.