Smith is an outspoken, MAGA-style firebrand who hasn’t managed to pull out a win in the area and would have been a more appealing (read: weaker) opponent for the freshman congressman in this swingy district. As I mentioned earlier, the 1st District has long been a Democratic stronghold — it hasn’t elected a Republican in over 140 years — but after redistricting, it was redrawn to become a tossup district, and is set to be the only real competitive Congressional race in North Carolina this fall.

—Kaleigh Rogers, 538

In North Carolina's 1st congressional district, Buckhout is projected to win the Republican primary, according to The New York Times. We wrote about this earlier, but her win comes on the strength of national Republican Party efforts to make her the nominee over two-time candidate in the district, Sandy Smith, a candidate with a more Trumpy profile. Buckhout will take on Democratic Rep. Don Davis in November.

—Monica Potts, 538

With more than 90 percent of North Carolina's expected vote in, we can now say more about the patterns in that state. First, Trump is romping statewide, with 75 percent to Haley's 23 percent. But where is Trump doing especially well? In counties with few people with college degrees, sure. But also in counties with lower population density and more Black voters. That said, it doesn't mean Trump is doing well with Black GOP voters — preliminary data from the North Carolina exit poll suggest that in fact non-White Republican primary voters were a bit less supportive of Trump than white Republican primary voters. Instead, Trump is doing especially well in the counties with more Black residents (regardless of whether they're voting tonight or not).

—Dan Hopkins, 538 contributor

With 81-year-old Rep. Kay Granger set to retire, the primary race to replace her in Texas's 12th District looks like it may go to the more establishment GOP candidate: state Rep. Craig Goldman, who is currently leading with 46 percent and 78 percent of expected votes in. He'll need to get 50 percent of the vote (plus one vote) to avoid a runoff with local businessman John O'Shea, a more Trumpian candidate who currently has 25 percent of the vote.

—Kaleigh Rogers, 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