If you follow politics closely, you’ve probably heard about the recent poll showing Donald Trump up by only eight points in Texas. I certainly have, as it was talked about all over the Internet. Obviously, that is a terrible poll for the GOP nominee. For the sake of perspective, Mitt Romney won the state by 16 points, so Trump is running about eight points, net, behind his predecessor, according to this survey. Moreover, he’s only receiving 41 percent of the vote.

You probably haven’t, however, heard much about the recent poll showing Hillary Clinton up by just seven points on Trump in Maine. I didn’t until almost a week after it came out. This is a terrible result for Clinton. For the sake of perspective, Barack Obama won the state by 15 points in 2012, so Clinton is running about eight points, net, behind Obama in this poll. Moreover, she’s only at 42 percent in the poll. Worse still, Maine allocates its electoral votes by congressional district, and Trump is running ahead of Clinton in the 2nd district (there are only two in the state).

I don’t really think the overall weight of the polling evidence is particularly consistent with either survey, yet I can come up with perfectly reasonable arguments why one or the other might be true. I can even come up with reasons why both might be correct: Donald Trump’s weakness with Hispanics (who traditionally vote Republican in Texas at a higher rate than Hispanics in other states) could cause a precipitous drop in his vote share in the Lone Star State. At the same time, his relative strength among working-class whites could help him in an overwhelmingly white state like Maine. In particular, we might expect him to do well in the 2nd district, where the state’s Trump-like Republican governor, Paul LePage, won by 13 points in 2014.

The real answer here is “It’s June, and these things will probably sort themselves out when we get more polling in September.” My guess is that Trump’s lead in Texas will grow over the course of the campaign, as will Clinton’s in Maine, though again, I wouldn’t be shocked if either of these statements proved false.

My real point here – and I promise to stop banging my drum after this, at least for now – is that we have yet another example of the way that the Internet is breaking down for purposes of election analysis. If Marco Rubio were the nominee, we’d have gotten a thorough dissection of the internals of the polls, with conservatives arguing for the Maine result and liberals embracing the Texas result. Or, everyone would dismiss both.

Both sides dislike Trump, however, so the Texas poll has received the lion’s share of the attention. Perhaps this simply reflects the fact that Texas is significantly more important, from an electoral perspective, than Maine. Perhaps. But I fear that this is exactly the sort of asymmetric processing and reporting of information that we would expect when everyone is looking for reasons that Trump will lose.