Test a Poll on 10,000 Simulated Voters PRIVATE DEMO

Poll the network, cut it by every demographic we hold, and watch the numbers move like a real sample — in seconds, with no fielding cost. These voters are simulated; every question and every demographic below is drawn from the questions we really ask our members.

SIMULATED PANEL — 10,000 generated pseudo-voters across 41 states / 359 counties. Nothing on this page is real member data. Do not publish these numbers as findings.

1 · The question

Pick a question we already ask

Every one of these is either on register_step2.php or in the party forums, so the simulated answers sit on the exact wording your members see.

Or write your own question Your answer options (comma-separated, 2–6)

A written question is answered from each voter's positions, ideology and demographics — so re-cutting the audience changes the result.

2 · The audience (these are the fields our signup form collects)

Age band

Gender

Education

Household income

Marital status

Household size

K-12 children in household

Housing

Location type

Employment

Voting consistency

Voice tier

Forum engagement

State

County

Party identification (pick one or more)

Ctrl/Cmd-click to select several (mobile: tap the ones you want).

Sample size (simulated completes)

Demographic options to show OPTION 1 — Basic Demographics OPTION 2 — Bundle A — Household & Family OPTION 3 — Bundle B — Economic Profile OPTION 4 — Bundle C — Civic Participation OPTION 5 — Bundle D — Issue & Debate Positions

Re-run with a new sample Download CSV

SIMULATED RESULT — 1,000 simulated completes from 10,000 matching pseudo-voters. Margin of error ±4.4%. Not a real poll.

Would you support capping county property tax increases if it meant cutting specific local government services?

Audience: All simulated voters · Question source: From our party forums (the debate threads)

Agree leads with 50.4% — a solid but not commanding lead (9.7 pts over Undecided / Depends on details).

Bar chart + AI narrative Cross-tab matrix (answer × segment) Segment leaderboard (sortable) Geography (state & county) Raw table + CSV export

Disagree — 8.9% (89)

Undecided / Depends on details — 40.7% (407)

Agree — 50.4% (504)

AI-Powered Breakdown generated from this exact response set

Computed live from the 1,000 simulated completes — no model call, no delay.

What drives the leader

Party identification: Not-so-strong Democrat (n=83) 0% (-50.4 pts)

Party identification: Strong Democrat (n=112) 0% (-50.4 pts)

Party identification: Strong Republican (n=174) 100% (+49.6 pts)

Party identification: Not-so-strong Republican (n=111) 91% (+40.6 pts)

Party identification: Independent / Leaning Democratic (n=92) 13% (-37.4 pts)

Party identification: Independent / Leaning Republican (n=122) 73.8% (+23.4 pts)

Where the leader is weakest

Party identification: Not-so-strong Democrat (n=83) 0% (-50.4 pts)

Party identification: Strong Democrat (n=112) 0% (-50.4 pts)

Party identification: Independent / Leaning Democratic (n=92) 13% (-37.4 pts)

Location type: In city limits (n=164) 31.7% (-18.7 pts)

Location type: Downtown (n=73) 32.9% (-17.5 pts)

Read-out

Lead with the Strong Republican block (party_lean): 100% back “Agree”, +49.6pt above the 50.4% average on n=174.
Do not open there: Not-so-strong Democrat (party_lean) runs -50.4pt under the average — 0% on n=83.
Geographic concentration: Kent County carries 2.1% of the sample at 61.9% on the lead answer.
Fielding cost of this cut: $0 · instant. A traditional panel would need 1,000 completes at ~$2–$6 each.
Answer spread (HHI) 0.428 — a real two-way contest.

Demographic cuts the 5 options

Each option is a bundle of demographic cuts. Option 1 is always included; the rest are the bundles you define. Every cut below is computed from the same simulated response set.

OPTION 1 · Basic Demographics on

Included with every poll. The six cuts every campaign needs on day one.

Age band

18-24 — 33.1% (n=121)

35-44 — 38.7% (n=155)

45-54 — 49% (n=151)

25-34 — 39.6% (n=159)

75+ — 63.4% (n=101)

55-64 — 64.7% (n=156)

65-74 — 65% (n=157)

Gender

Male — 51.5% (n=439)

Female — 49.4% (n=538)

Prefer not to say — 64.3% (n=14)

Non-binary — 33.3% (n=9)

Party identification

True Independent / Moderate / Other — 41.5% (n=306)

Independent / Leaning Democratic — 13% (n=92)

Not-so-strong Democrat — 0% (n=83)

Strong Republican — 100% (n=174)

Not-so-strong Republican — 91% (n=111)

Strong Democrat — 0% (n=112)

Independent / Leaning Republican — 73.8% (n=122)

Registered voter status

1 — 50% (n=884)

0 — 53.4% (n=116)

State

ME — 54.5% (n=55)

RI — 49.1% (n=57)

MA — 58.3% (n=48)

PA — 54.5% (n=22)

OR — 56.7% (n=30)

VT — 53.5% (n=71)

DE — 47.8% (n=23)

WY — 42.9% (n=42)

CT — 42.9% (n=21)

WV — 61.5% (n=13)

UT — 47.1% (n=68)

MT — 68.4% (n=19)

AK — 44.8% (n=29)

AZ — 48.1% (n=52)

ND — 56.5% (n=46)

NH — 41.8% (n=67)

SC — 50% (n=54)

NM — 51.2% (n=41)

KS — 63.6% (n=11)

NJ — 68.4% (n=19)

AR — 55.6% (n=27)

FL — 42.3% (n=26)

HI — 56.5% (n=23)

NV — 38.8% (n=67)

ID — 62.5% (n=8)

AL — 80% (n=5)

NE — 60% (n=10)

DC — 60% (n=10)

LA — 42.9% (n=7)

OK — 33.3% (n=6)

SD — 50% (n=6)

TN — 20% (n=5)

Voting consistency

Only in major Presidential elections — 47.7% (n=193)

Rarely vote — 44.3% (n=88)

Every single election (Primary & General) — 54.7% (n=417)

Almost every election (Major midterms & presidential) — 49.6% (n=270)

First-time participant (Future Voter) — 34.4% (n=32)

OPTION 2 · Bundle A — Household & Family switched off

Who is actually at the kitchen table: marital status, household size, children, housing, density.

Switch this option on

OPTION 3 · Bundle B — Economic Profile switched off

Pocketbook voters: education, employment situation, household income.

Switch this option on

OPTION 4 · Bundle C — Civic Participation switched off

Will they actually show up (and do they talk about it): voting consistency, voice tier, forum engagement.

Switch this option on

OPTION 5 · Bundle D — Issue & Debate Positions on

What they already told us on the signup questionnaire and in the party forums — the deepest cut we hold.

Infrastructure & roads stance

5 — 53.9% (n=707)

4 — 22.4% (n=205)

6 — 87.5% (n=88)

Public safety funding stance

5 — 80.5% (n=431)

4 — 28.9% (n=508)

3 — 0% (n=51)

6 — 100% (n=10)

School funding / choice stance

5 — 82.1% (n=397)

4 — 31.6% (n=452)

6 — 100% (n=35)

3 — 0% (n=116)

Regulation & business stance

4 — 35.9% (n=395)

3 — 2.6% (n=191)

6 — 100% (n=65)

5 — 84.9% (n=344)

2 — 0% (n=5)

Federal economy stance

4 — 42.1% (n=477)

5 — 91.2% (n=307)

3 — 2.6% (n=192)

2 — 0% (n=6)

6 — 100% (n=18)

Abortion stance

4 — 18.7% (n=294)

3 — 0% (n=126)

5 — 65.5% (n=362)

6 — 98.1% (n=208)

7 — 100% (n=8)

Property-tax cap debate

0 — 0% (n=407)

1 — 100% (n=394)

2 — 100% (n=110)

-1 — 0% (n=88)

Parental-notification debate

0 — 39.7% (n=406)

2 — 100% (n=84)

1 — 81.8% (n=307)

-1 — 4.4% (n=183)

-2 — 0% (n=20)

Biological sex in sports debate

0 — 38.1% (n=375)

-1 — 2.1% (n=190)

2 — 100% (n=87)

1 — 87.4% (n=309)

-2 — 0% (n=39)

Single-sex spaces debate

0 — 37.2% (n=395)

-1 — 3% (n=201)

2 — 100% (n=81)

1 — 86.5% (n=312)

-2 — 0% (n=11)

Policing vs. community safety debate

-1 — 5.6% (n=197)

0 — 43.6% (n=427)

1 — 85.1% (n=316)

2 — 100% (n=38)

-2 — 0% (n=22)

Senate/SCOTUS reform debate

0 — 44.1% (n=488)

2 — 100% (n=22)

1 — 86.5% (n=304)

-1 — 2.2% (n=184)

This is the demo. The workspace is where you work.

The demo runs one poll at a time. In the pollster workspace you write and save your own polls, keep an audience template per race, re-run them as opinion moves, and compare runs side by side.

Open the pollster workspace →

Private demo · token-gated · noindex · not linked publicly. Panel seeded from the same fields our members complete at register_step2.php.