Those who were there have not forgotten it. On election night, November 8, 2016, after months in which countless polls had all but crowned Hillary Clinton the clear winner, the states of Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, long considered safely Democratic by pollsters, fell one after another to Republican Donald Trump, handing him the presidency.

Although Clinton won the popular vote, the polls had missed the mark spectacularly, and the outcome caught much of U.S. society, the media and the political establishment by surprise. In the aftermath came a litany of postmortems and mea culpas from the U.S. polling industry, which admitted it had failed to grasp the mood of the elusive Trump voter.

Now, a decade after that statistical debacle, polls are forecasting a so-called “blue wave” in the November 3 midterm elections. In surveys measuring the generic congressional ballot, Democrats lead Republicans by eight points. That is roughly the same margin they held in 2018, when they regained control of the House of Representatives with a net gain of 41 seats. Democrats therefore have plenty of reason to feel optimistic about their chances of winning it back again.

Things also look promising for the Democrats in the Senate. Democratic candidates are leading in states that Trump won comfortably in 2024, including Texas, Ohio, Iowa and Alaska. But their advantage in those races is so small that it falls within the margin of error.

And on the eve of an election, experts say, it is worth remembering that a poll is only an estimate and that a small statistical miss could turn a potential “blue wave” either into an electoral tsunami that hands Democrats both chambers of Congress or into little more than a ripple that gives them control of the House of Representatives alone.

How large are polling errors?

In the last five midterm elections, the final polling average missed the actual result by between 0.2 and 3.5 percentage points. An error of two or three points may seem small, but what matters is that polling errors are rarely random, explains Charles Franklin, a prominent pollster who heads the respected Marquette Law School Poll in Wisconsin.

When polls miss the mark, they tend to do so in the same direction across the country. In other words, if polls are currently underestimating Republicans in the Senate race in Texas, they are likely doing the same in Ohio and Iowa. That is why a single polling bias can decide several races at once, benefiting the same party. “Most of those battleground states end up all moving in the Republican direction or all moving in the Democratic direction,” explains Franklin.

Several recent elections illustrate this cascading effect. In the 2006 and 2014 midterms, polls overestimated Democratic support; in 2010 and 2018, they overestimated Republicans. The same pattern has appeared in presidential elections: polls underestimated Barack Obama in 2012 and Trump in 2016, 2020 and 2024.

The chart below shows how those polling misses have played out across recent election cycles.

Why does this happen? One reason a “wave” can become a tsunami or fizzle out in the midterms is that local races are closely tied to national political forces, which act like a prevailing current, explains Charles Franklin.

“Presidential approval, the state of the economy, how you feel about the war with Iran… those national forces push all those races in one direction,” he says. That is why, if polls misjudge the national mood, the bias tends to be repeated across multiple contests.

This time, those “national forces” appear to be hurting Trump’s party. His approval ratings are at historic lows because of inflation, gasoline prices and broader economic concerns. It is even possible, Franklin says, that this anti-Trump sentiment is being overrepresented in polls. He warns that pollsters may be picking up “too many” Democrats who are “happy to take a survey and tell you how much they dislike the president.”

What to expect in the House of Representatives?

The two chambers of Congress do not respond in the same way to polling swings.

In the House of Representatives, the Democratic lead on the generic ballot is so large and so consistent that Republicans could only hold on to their current majority if polling errors exceeded those seen in any of the last nine elections.

At this stage, Franklin says, the real question is not whether Democrats will win the House, but by how much. If the polls are overstating Democratic support and the party gains fewer than 15 seats, election night will be “disappointing.” A gain of 15 to 20 seats would be “plausible”; 20 to 25 would be “pretty good”; and a sweep of 30 seats or more would amount to “a great night.”

And in the Senate?

Here, Republicans begin with an advantage. Of the 65 senators who are not up for reelection this year, 31 are Republicans and, in the event of a 50-50 tie, the deciding vote belongs to Vice President J. D. Vance.

Several competitive races are being decided by margins of less than three percentage points, and an error of the kind seen in the 2014 midterms or the 2020 presidential election would be enough for Republicans to retain control of the upper chamber.

Again, everything depends on the direction of any polling bias, Franklin says. If the polls have overestimated Democratic support, particularly in traditionally Republican states such as Texas and Kansas, then by the morning of November 4 we could find that Trump’s party has held on to the Senate. If, on the other hand, the polls are underestimating Democrats, they could also capture the upper chamber, potentially ending up with a majority of 52 or 53 seats. Both scenarios, though opposite, are plausible.

There are precedents for that as well. In the 2012 presidential election, for example, polls underestimated Obama by more than three percentage points.

If Democrats outperform their polling numbers by a similar margin this year, the wave really could become a tsunami. The Democrats would win districts that Trump carried by more than 10 points and put states such as Kansas, South Carolina and Mississippi into play, conservative strongholds that should not, in theory, be giving Republicans headaches. Yet Trump has been forced to campaign in them precisely because of his party’s weak polling numbers there.

How to read the polls with caution

None of these scenarios should be interpreted as a prediction, Franklin says. Recent history suggests that the real question is not whether polls will be wrong, but by how much and in which direction. Polling errors can vary from state to state, and calculations like these do not account for the individual strengths of incumbents or the personal appeal of specific candidates.

Faced with the daily flood of polling averages, Franklin advises against treating polls as crystal balls, “unless you happen to know a good witch in your neighborhood,” he jokes. Rather than focusing solely on whether a candidate leads by one or two points, a razor-thin margin, he recommends paying attention to the spread of the data. When polls in the same state point in different directions, with some showing one party ahead and others favoring its rival, the only firm conclusion is uncertainty.

His recommendation on the eve of the elections? “Be uncertain.”

In October 2006, viewers were introduced to Dexter Morgan, a Miami police forensic analyst specializing in blood-spatter analysis who, in his spare time, liked to hunt down serial killers who had escaped justice to appease “the dark passenger” within him. He was a likable guy with an unshakeable, if questionable, moral code, and audiences fell in love with him.

Twenty years later, after a controversial ending to the original series (2006-2013) and a death that turned out not to be one in Dexter: New Blood (2021-2022), he is still killing and dispensing justice, now in New York.

Michael C. Hall, 55, knows that his name will always be linked to the character, who in the second season of Dexter: Resurrection is going through his own version of a midlife crisis. “He has an appetite for recognition, and for someone like him that could get him in a lot of trouble,” the actor says in a video-call interview.

As a nod to longtime fans and to mark the show’s 20th anniversary, the series has recreated its iconic opening credits sequence.

“It was like walking into the ghost of my former self and trying to move with it,” says Michael C. Hall, noticeably more relaxed and smiley than his character usually is.

Question. Dexter has grown with you as an actor and with us as viewers. How has he changed over these years?

Answer. He used to compartmentalize the regular person he pretended to be from the killer he really was. The line separating them has blurred, and now he has integrated both sides. That muddies the waters. It‘s not so neat and tidy in terms of what he’s doing. When Dexter interacts with his son, for example, he’s not pretending to be a father; he actually experiences what it is to be a father and to have a real relationship. Twenty years have passed for the character and for all of us, myself included. I don’t have to act like I’m 20 years older — I just am, and so is he, and with age come struggle, wisdom, battle scars…

Q. Do you think the character has changed with you, that your changes as an actor have made the character evolve?

A. Sure, although I can’t say which influences which. Dexter is, ultimately, words on a page, and I, as an actor, am the guardian of my sense of that character’s truth. He comes to life through me, so Dexter’s inner life is mine; what happens to me on a given day or across a decade affects the character. The truth is I don’t spend much time thinking about how he has changed me or how I have changed him. At this point I just try to let it happen.

Q. Do you remember how the role of Dexter first came to you? You had just finished Six Feet Under (2001-2006), with one of the most groundbreaking characters on television at the time, David Fisher, the gay son in the central family, and I wonder whether you had any doubts about signing on to a project like this…

A. I did, yes. After Six Feet Under ended, I moved to New York intending to return to the theater, and the last thing I thought I’d do was another television show. But the Dexter script came, and there was something too compelling about the character. The audacity of making a show that invited people to go on a journey with someone like Dexter was a compelling invitation. But I didn’t know if it would work — honestly, I didn’t know if we would be able to pull it off. I never imagined I’d be talking to you about the character 20 years later and that he would still have a life and continue evolving. It’s wild. But yes, I had some misgivings. But anything worth doing is probably accompanied by a good dose of fear, and I think Dexter was worth doing

Q. What would be your top three favorite Dexter villains?

A. Ummm. I’d say Arthur Mitchell, the Trinity Killer [played by John Lithgow]; Brian Moser, the Ice Truck Killer, Dexter’s brother [played by Christian Camargo]; and Miguel Prado [Jimmy Smits]. It’s hard to choose, but I’d say that’s Dexter’s Mount Rushmore of villains.

Q. How has playing such a charismatic character affected your career? Has it influenced, for example, the types of roles you’ve been offered or the projects you’ve been approached with?

A. Yes, of course, but that’s a done deal. Dexter is the character with whom I think I’ll always be associated. I’ve done a lot of other things on stage and screen. I never imagined when I started as an actor that I would do a series for five seasons like Six Feet Under, let alone that I would intermittently play a character for another 20 years. Of course it affects things, though it’s hard to say how because there’s no parallel universe to compare to where it didn’t happen. It affects how people see me, what I’m offered and what I’m not… But I’m cool with it. Obviously I haven’t run away from Dexter; it’s a fascinating world, and I’ve returned because I think there’s still more to explore.

Q. Why do you think Dexter is still so popular two decades later?

A. I’m probably in a uniquely bad position to assess that because I’m so close to it, but we live in a world where we increasingly sense that we’re not in control. We feel controlled, manipulated, lied to. Dexter is a character who, in his little corner of the world, has taken control. He loses it from time to time and then regains it. People like to watch him get into trouble and get out of it. And we all have, in some way, a shadow, a darkness we manage — maybe not as formidable as his, but enough that we can relate. And the fact that we hear his inner thoughts gives us the sense that we’re along for the ride with him rather than watching it from the outside.

Q. We already know it’s hard to kill Dexter Morgan, but then, what would be the perfect ending for the character in your opinion?

A. I don’t know, I don’t know… The perfect ending… To be shot into space? To dematerialize and turn into mist? I don’t know [laughs].

Q. Have you thought about how long you’ll be able to keep playing Dexter?

A. Yes, I have thought about it, but I don’t know… At this point, I’ve learned never to say never, you know…

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition

Ten European countries are investigating alleged abuses committed against their nationals while taking part in expeditions organized by the Global Sumud Flotilla, which was carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza and was intercepted by Israel in international waters.

Prosecutors from 10 European Union member states — Spain, France, Italy, Portugal, Belgium, the Netherlands, Poland, Slovakia, Sweden and Finland — along with Australia, have been cooperating and sharing information on cases and investigations opened following complaints against Israeli politicians, officials and military commanders, including members of Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet, for torture, kidnapping, ill-treatment and other alleged crimes. This was confirmed to EL PAÍS by legal sources who took part in a meeting held on September 16 in The Hague.

All the countries that attended the meeting have some form of inquiry underway into the flotilla raid, according to those sources, who said the purpose of the gathering was to exchange information on their respective investigations. The meeting, which lasted around eight hours, took place within a framework of cooperation coordinated by Eurojust, the EU’s judicial cooperation agency. Australian representatives attended as guests. In at least five other European countries, including Germany, Norway and Austria, complaints have been filed over the same events, but the authorities have not yet decided whether to open formal investigations.

Most of the states represented at the meeting were primarily interested in gathering information that could support cases they have already opened, or may pursue, in their own jurisdictions. These focus on alleged crimes committed against their citizens during the flotilla raid in October 2025 and when a second humanitarian mission was intercepted by Israeli forces in international waters in May this year, the sources said.

The first reports of the meeting in The Hague emerged in Italy, according to an exclusive report by the newspaper La Repubblica. The Rome Attorney General’s Office, headed by chief prosecutor Francesco Lo Voi, later confirmed in a statement that meetings had taken place with representatives from other countries, without providing further details. A spokesperson for Eurojust, meanwhile, declined to comment “on possible meetings or confirm the existence of ongoing investigations.”

Investigations in Spain

Spain was represented at the meeting by Dolores Delgado, the prosecutor responsible for coordinating human rights and democratic memory cases within Spain’s Attorney General’s Office. Delgado launched an investigation from within the Attorney General’s Office in 2025 into crimes allegedly committed by Israel in Gaza.

Also present was investigating judge Francisco de Jorge, who is overseeing an ongoing case at Spain’s High Court, the Audiencia Nacional, concerning the flotilla raid. In July, he agreed to hear a criminal complaint against Eyal Zamir, chief of staff of the Israeli military, and Ram Rotberg, commander of the Israeli navy, allowing the case to proceed.

These sources note that, unlike other countries, Spain has been investigating the matter for many months. In June 2025, after receiving a report from the National Police, Delgado opened a case file into the actions of the Israeli military against the civilian population in Gaza. The aim was to gather evidence and submit it to the proceedings already under way against Israel before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), as well as to the cases against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israel’s then defence minister, Yoav Gallant, before the International Criminal Court (ICC).

After the flotilla raid took place in October last year, Spanish prosecutors incorporated the incident into their investigation and, according to prosecution sources, prepared reports and took testimony from several of those affected. Among them was Ada Colau, former mayor of Barcelona, who was travelling aboard one of the vessels in the expedition.

However, once proceedings were opened at the High Court, every aspect of the investigation relating to the raid on the vessels had to be transferred to Judge Francisco de Jorge. Under Spanish law, when an investigating judge opens proceedings into specific events, prosecutors cannot conduct a parallel investigation into the same facts.

The High Court case also has a distinctive feature. Unlike other countries, which have opened investigations because their own citizens were affected and want to examine crimes that may have been committed against them, Judge De Jorge accepted the complaints against the two Israeli commanders after concluding that, under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Spain has jurisdiction only over events that took place aboard flotilla vessels sailing under the Spanish flag.

According to his interpretation, those vessels were, for practical legal purposes, Spanish territory. Spain can therefore investigate alleged crimes committed on board them, regardless of the nationality of the victims. The judge stressed, however, that his jurisdiction ends once passengers were transferred to Israeli territory or to other vessels. In other words, he cannot investigate alleged abuses committed after flotilla activists left the Spanish-flagged ships.

For freelance journalist Néstor Prieto, one of the flotilla participants who led the complaint before the High Court, the investigation is “positive, but insufficient,” because the alleged rights violations continued during the activists’ several days in detention and because it excludes participants who were not travelling aboard Spanish-flagged vessels.

The reporter, who was part of the October 2025 mission aboard the Adara, says several military vessels surrounded their ship, fired tear gas and boarded it. From that moment, they spent “between 12 and 14 hours” cut off from the outside world and crammed into the vessel’s cabin. During that time, they were subjected to physical and verbal abuse, threatened with firearms, and given little access to food, water or medication. Upon arrival in port, those detained were transferred to a prison, where they remained until being deported more than 72 hours later.

In the flotilla that set sail in May, the level of violence escalated significantly. As EL PAÍS contributor Ignacio Ladrón de Guevara, who was aboard one of the vessels, later recounted, the beatings and mistreatment were so severe that the mission recorded at least 35 bone fractures and more than 10 allegations of sexual abuse. Taser shocks and stun grenades also became part of daily life for members of the flotilla.

Saif Abukeshek, one of the leaders of the Global Sumud Flotilla, who was detained during the May mission, believes all these allegations should ultimately lead to convictions.

“They carried out a military interception in European waters and entered Greek territory. The violations committed by Israel are very clear and the orders that were given were made public,” he says, referring to threats issued by the Israeli government.

The Palestinian-Spanish activist spoke to EL PAÍS from the Italian port of Augusta, where campaigners were carrying out actions at sea to prevent commercial ships bound for Israel from making a stop there.

Israel’s chain of command under scrutiny

Bound, forced to kneel and publicly humiliated. That was how Itamar Ben Gvir, Israel’s far-right national security minister, chose to present the flotilla activists detained in May.

“This is how we welcome terror supporters. Welcome to Israel,” the minister declared in a video he posted on social media. The footage sparked an international outcry and even drew criticism from Netanyahu. In June, prosecutors in Italy opened an investigation into Ben Gvir on allegations of kidnapping and torture.

Following complaints filed by 50 Italian passengers, prosecutors decided to go a step further and announced a broader investigation targeting not only Ben Gvir but also 13 other senior Israeli officials, including Defence Minister Israel Katz. Unlike Spain, the Italian authorities are seeking to establish the full sequence of events, from the moment the vessels were forcibly boarded until the flotilla participants were deported from Israel.

Israel’s entire chain of command is under scrutiny, from Eyal Zamir, commander of the Israel Defense Forces, and Daniel Levy, head of the national police, to the officer in charge of the Ashdod naval base, the port where the activists were brought ashore, and the governor of Ketziot Prison, where several of them were held for days.

After being named in the investigation, Israel’s prison authorities said they had acted “in accordance with the law and with full respect for the activists’ fundamental rights.”

Although they are examining abuses allegedly committed during two different flotilla missions, Italian prosecutors argue that the cases point to a modus operandi involving systematic violence and human rights violations. They also reinforce the view that, although the alleged abuses took place at different times, they were carried out under the same chain of command.

What began as isolated complaints and condemnations has developed into a growing wave of cases moving through European courts. In June, judicial investigations were opened in France and Poland. That same month, Australian police announced that they were investigating allegations of rape and torture made by a group of activists from their country.

In the Netherlands, seven flotilla participants filed a complaint in July accusing Israeli military personnel of sexual assault. In August, the Turkish government, one of the strongest critics of the Israeli authorities, issued arrest warrants for 35 Israeli suspects, including Netanyahu, over alleged crimes against humanity and torture committed against flotilla participants.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition