How have independent and undecided voter preferences in New York shifted between mid‑2025 and early 2026 according to Siena polls?
Executive summary
Siena polling shows independent voters in New York moved noticeably toward Republican challengers between mid‑2025 and early 2026 while a large pool of undecided voters persisted and continued to shape reported margins; Siena’s August–September 2025 state surveys flagged a pronounced shift of independents toward Elise Stefanik and roughly 20% undecided, and by January 2026 statewide cross‑tabs still show incumbents leading but not clearing 50 percent with independents and undecideds playing an outsized role [1] [2] [3] [4]. All of these results come with the usual polling caveats Siena highlights about margin of error, weighting and late shifts among undecideds [5] [4].
1. Mid‑2025 snapshot: a precarious Democratic baseline
Siena’s summer and early‑fall 2025 state work captured a vulnerable picture for Democrats in New York: multiple Siena surveys in mid‑2025 showed Governor Kathy Hochul with leads over named Republican opponents but rarely above 50 percent, and campaign analysts and local coverage highlighted that independents were breaking toward Republican alternatives — a dynamic Siena summarized as “losing independent voters to Elise Stefanik” in an August poll that also recorded roughly one‑in‑five voters undecided or refusing to answer [1] [2].
2. The undecided bloc: large and persistent through late 2025
Siena’s state surveys repeatedly flagged a substantial undecided share in New York contests in 2025; the August Siena poll cited by local reporting put undecided/refuse at about 20 percent, and regional write‑ups emphasized that Hochul had not cleared 50 percent against several GOP matchups largely because a significant portion of respondents remained uncommitted — a pattern Siena’s own summaries and local press noted as “loom[ing] large” for 2026 [1] [2].
3. Independents’ tilt: evidence of movement toward GOP challengers
Local coverage of Siena fieldwork reported a clear narrative: independents were a source of GOP gains, particularly in hypothetical matchups with Stefanik, and that loss of independent support was credited by Republican operatives as a driver of tighter margins in mid‑2025 polls [1]. Siena’s cross‑tabs and toplines define independents as self‑identified independents, underscoring that this movement reflects changes among that specific group rather than partisan “leaners” [4].
4. Early‑2026: leadership holds but without decisive consolidation
By January 2026, Siena’s New York‑related reporting and the Times/Siena national cross‑tabs show incumbents and Democrats retaining leads in many matchups, but still not consolidating an unassailable majority — the January Times/Siena toplines reiterate methodological definitions and margins of error and make clear that independents are a distinct, pivotal category in the dataset [3] [4]. Siena’s national and special surveys from January continued to emphasize national trends but the state‑level pattern remained consistent: leads, not landslides, with independents and undecideds determining swing possibilities [6] [3].
5. Interpreting the change: magnitude, drivers and uncertainty
The measurable shift between mid‑2025 and early‑2026 in Siena’s New York work is best summarized as a movement of some independents toward Republican challengers (documented in August reporting) combined with a stubborn undecided cohort that kept margins fluid into January; Siena’s public materials and the New York reporting caution readers that sampling error, weighting adjustments and late shifts among undecideds can alter final outcomes — in short, the shift is real in the polls but far from irreversible [1] [5] [4].
6. Alternative readings and potential agendas
Campaigns quickly frame Siena results to their advantage — Republican operatives highlighted independent movement as a sign of momentum while Democratic observers pointed to continued Democratic leads and the historical tendency of New York to vote Democratic, a longer‑term pattern Siena has previously noted in its recaps [1] [7]. Readers should also note that local press and campaign quotes can amplify specific findings (for example, the 20 percent undecided figure), so the broader Siena toplines and cross‑tabs remain the best source to judge the full distribution and statistical uncertainty [4] [3].