Is there any reason for me to believe the polls when they showed him losing Michigan Wisconsin
He barely won those states...? Polls have margins of error: in many cases, +/- 3 percentage points. That means a poll that shows a tie could mean the result is anywhere from one candidate being up by 3 to that same candidate being down by 3; the margin could be off by as much as 6 points.
| State | Poll Avg | Result | Diff |
| IA | -2.9 | -9.4 | 6.5 |
| OH | -1.9 | -8.1 | 6.2 |
| WI | +5.3 | -0.8 | 6.1 |
| WI | +5.3 | +0.8 | 6.1 |
| ME | +7.5 | +3.0 | 4.5 |
| MI | +4.2 | -0.2 | 4.4 |
| NC | +0.7 | -3.7 | 4.4 |
| PA | +3.7 | -0.7 | 4.4 |
| MN | +5.8 | +1.5 | 4.3 |
| VA | +5.5 | +5.3 | 0.2 |
| CO | +4.1 | +4.9 | 0.8 |
As you can see, every state according to the 538 model was either right on the line of that 6-point variance or well within it. So the notion that polling was a "flop" in 2016 really is exaggerated: basically, the polls were off by as much as their disclaimers always say they can be.
You're not going to have a situation where the polls are showing Trump's approval underwater by 20 points when it is really A-OK in reality. There's room for variance, but it could just as easily tilt in the direction you don't want it to tilt as it could in the other direction.
