Earlier I wrote that although more Republican women are running, the GOP conference is still largely represented by men. North Carolina, where polls just closed, nicely illustrates some of the reasons that Republican women continue to trail Democratic women by such large margins, in Congress. North Carolina has low female representation in their state legislature (which is just 29 percent female), and that limits their recruitment from that pool. And in today's open primaries in safely Republican districts where the GOP primary will effectively decide the next representative, women aren't among the most competitive. As Kaleigh wrote earlier, in the 8th District outside Charlotte, the two GOP front runners are state Rep. John Bradford, and Baptist minister Mark Harris. And in the 10th District, the race is largely between state Rep. Grey Mills and Pat Harrigan, a gun manufacturer. There are several non-incumbent women running in the state today, but none of the groups we are watching that support Republican women (Winning for Women, VIEW-PAC, E-PAC or Maggie's List) have made endorsements.

—Meredith Conroy, 538 contributor

ABC News projects that Trump will win Virginia's Republican presidential primary. We'll have to wait to see how the final totals break down, but this isn't much of a surprise considering Trump had comfortably led most polling of the GOP race in the Old Dominion. Now, Virginia's more highly-educated population and Trump's weaker performance there in 2016 probably makes it one of Haley's better states tonight. Yet the fact the result there has already been projected less than a half hour after polls closed may foreshadow a Trump sweep tonight. Loudoun County's early returns demonstrate how Haley is coming up short: Sitting outside of Washington, D.C., in vote-rich northern Virginia, Loudoun is a Democratic-leaning and highly affluent county — the kind of place Haley has done better in. But she's still trailing Trump there by around 6 percentage points, 52 percent to 46 percent, with one-third of the expected vote reporting.

—Geoffrey Skelley, 538

While we wait for polls to close and results to come in, I'll muse about the bigger picture here. Depending on how things go, this might be the end of Haley's candidacy. But either way, we should think about what's at stake in the contest between her and Trump. Broadly speaking, she has increasingly presented herself as the Trump/MAGA alternative. In some ways, she's made this distinction clear, most recently by suggesting she might not stick with her pledge to support the party nominee, and denouncing his actions on Jan. 6, 2021.

But the rest of her candidacy has been mostly about other stuff — how she'd be more competitive against Biden, and about giving voters a choice in the primary. On one of the main issues that set Trump apart from the rest of the GOP field in 2016, immigration, Haley has also been very conservative, signing one of the toughest state bills when she was governor of South Carolina and adopting Trump's language about toughness at the border. As in 2016, Trump seems poised to soundly defeat his primary rivals. But in terms of the real GOP alternatives to Trumpism, it's definitely not 2016 anymore.

—Julia Azari, 538 contributor

The main concerns about the top candidates didn’t resonate with primary voters in North Carolina. Seventy-five percent of likely North Carolina Republican primary voters said that Trump’s criminal indictments were not a serious consideration for them, according to a February poll by Emerson College/The Hill, while 25 percent said the indictments raised “serious doubts” in their minds about voting for Trump. Democratic primary voters in the state were more worried about Biden’s age than Republican primary voters were about Trump’s indictments: 34 percent of likely Democratic primary voters said Biden’s age raised serious doubts about voting for him, while 66 percent said it was not a consideration.

—Mary Radcliffe, 538

It has become somewhat of a theme of our live blogs this primary calendar to note that Trump's challengers are beating their polls. This first looked to be the case in New Hampshire, where polls significantly underestimate support among Republican likely voters for Haley. But the pattern is more robust than one state: In fact Haley has been beating her polls by an average of five points (in vote share) once you account for undecided voters in these surveys. The consistency of this pattern is striking enough to warrant a post on the matter.

As Mary said earlier, polling primaries is hard! That is betrayed by the fact that POTUS primary polls are by far the least accurate type of poll in 538's pollster rating database going back to 1999. But error is different than bias, and when most of the polls are off in the same direction, something has gone awry.

That "something" is likely the difficulty in obtaining opinions of moderate Republicans from samples of "likely Republican primary voters." Remember that fewer than one percent of people called for a poll actually complete the interview. That means the ones that do are statistical "weirdos" (excuse the technical language). Pollsters adjust for this by weighting their samples to known population benchmarks — like the percent of all adults who are white, over 65, have a college education etc. But in primaries, such benchmarks do not actually exist; pollsters are just making educated guesses about them.

My theory is that most of these primary polls pulling samples of voters from voter registration lists are missing moderate crossover partisans and first-time voters. Additionally, we know that people who are highly motivated to participate in polls (the "weirdos") also happen to be the most politically and ideologically extreme Americans. That's a recipe for polling bias in primaries, where weighting to party, past vote and polarized demographic benchmarks does not control for the partisan consequences of overrepresenting politically engaged Americans.

Now, none of this is to say that polling is "broken." It's just hard to precisely sample a population that doesn't really exist. The polls for the 2024 primary still have below-average error, historically speaking, so we shouldn't go throwing out the baby with the bathwater. But this could nevertheless be a sign of pollsters having a hard time reaching moderate "normie" voters. And if that persists, it could have consequences for general election polls too.

—G. Elliott Morris, 538