J. Ann Selzer, one of the most respected pollsters in political circles, has officially announced her departure from election polling, closing a remarkable chapter that many considered a "gold-standard" in the field. Over the weekend, Selzer reflected on her final Iowa poll for the Des Moines Register, which had unexpectedly misfired in predicting the 2024 presidential race, marking an unusual and ironic note in her otherwise stellar career.
In a column for the Des Moines Register, Selzer shared her mixed emotions. "Over a year ago I advised the Register I would not renew when my 2024 contract expired,” she wrote, expressing her intention to pursue “other ventures and opportunities.” Despite years of success, she admitted, “Would I have liked to make this announcement after a final poll aligned with Election Day results? Of course. It’s ironic that it’s just the opposite.”
In her final Iowa poll, Selzer’s survey had Vice President Kamala Harris leading Donald Trump 47% to 44% among likely Iowa voters. Yet, when election results rolled in, Trump secured a decisive victory over Harris with a 56% to 42.7% split, winning Iowa for the third consecutive time.
Other polls leading up to Election Day had shown Trump in a strong position in Iowa, while Selzer’s survey stood out as an “outlier,” sparking both curiosity and criticism from political observers and Trump supporters.
The Trump campaign wasted no time in capitalizing on Selzer’s miss. In a statement, Deputy Political Director Alex Latcham remarked, “Congratulations to Donald J. Trump and J.D. Vance on their victory… Hawkeye state voters are eager for President Trump to fix what Kamala Harris broke.” Latcham added a pointed note toward Selzer herself, saying that the Trump administration would work to “protect Social Security for retirees like Ann Selzer.”
On Election Night, Selzer acknowledged the discrepancy, labeling her poll an "outlier" and promising to review the data to identify where things may have gone astray. Register Executive Editor Carol Hunter echoed this sentiment, noting that the paper would “closely review the disparity” as part of a broader effort to understand what happened.
Reflecting on the nature of polling itself, Selzer addressed the limits and unpredictable twists of her profession in her Register column, writing, “Polling is a science of estimation, and science has a way of periodically humbling the scientist. So, I’m humbled, yet always willing to learn from unexpected findings.”
She acknowledged that her long-standing reputation for accuracy may have made her more confident in her “outlier position,” yet she accepted that even the best in the field can sometimes get it wrong.
Looking ahead, Selzer shared her enthusiasm for future opportunities outside of political polling. While she didn’t specify her next steps, she hinted at broadening her consulting work and applying her research skills to a wider array of clients. “My work will continue for current clients and for clients yet to come,” she explained, noting her interest in “putting other talents to work for the benefit of new clients.”