Posted on 09/21/2012 11:35:02 AM PDT by Signalman
Republicans are getting depressed under an avalanche of polling suggesting that an Obama victory is in the offing. They, in fact, suggest no such thing! Here’s why:
1. All of the polling out there uses some variant of the 2008 election turnout as its model for weighting respondents and this overstates the Democratic vote by a huge margin.
In English, this means that when you do a poll you ask people if they are likely to vote. But any telephone survey always has too few blacks, Latinos, and young people and too many elderly in its sample. That’s because some don’t have landlines or are rarely at home or don’t speak English well enough to be interviewed or don’t have time to talk. Elderly are overstated because they tend to be home and to have time. So you need to increase the weight given to interviews with young people, blacks and Latinos and count those with seniors a bit less.
Normally, this task is not difficult. Over the years, the black, Latino, young, and elderly proportion of the electorate has been fairly constant from election to election, except for a gradual increase in the Hispanic vote. You just need to look back at the last election to weight your polling numbers for this one.
But 2008 was no ordinary election. Blacks, for example, usually cast only 11% of the vote, but, in 2008, they made up 14% of the vote. Latinos increased their share of the vote by 1.5% and college kids almost doubled their vote share. Almost all pollsters are using the 2008 turnout models in weighting their samples. Rasmussen, more accurately, uses a mixture of 2008 and 2004 turnouts in determining his sample. That’s why his data usually is better for Romney.
But polling indicates a widespread lack of enthusiasm among Obama’s core demographic support due to high unemployment, disappointment with his policies and performance, and the lack of novelty in voting for a black candidate now that he has already served as president.
If you adjust virtually any of the published polls to reflect the 2004 vote, not the 2008 vote, they show the race either tied or Romney ahead, a view much closer to reality.
2. Almost all of the published polls show Obama getting less than 50% of the vote and less than 50% job approval. A majority of the voters either support Romney or are undecided in almost every poll.
But the fact is that the undecided vote always goes against the incumbent. In 1980 (the last time an incumbent Democrat was beaten), for example, the Gallup Poll of October 27th had Carter ahead by 45-39. Their survey on November 2nd showed Reagan catching up and leading by three points. In the actual voting, the Republican won by nine. The undecided vote broke sharply — and unanimously — for the challenger.
An undecided voter has really decided not to back the incumbent. He just won’t focus on the race until later in the game.
So, when the published poll shows Obama ahead by, say, 48-45, he’s really probably losing by 52-48!
Add these two factors together and the polls that are out there are all misleading. Any professional pollster (those consultants hired by candidates not by media outlets) would publish two findings for each poll — one using 2004 turnout modeling and the other using 2008 modeling. This would indicate just how dependent on an unusually high turnout of his base the Obama camp really is.
One thing, though, that we SHOULD all remember. The 2004 day of election exist polls were absolutely, unquestionably falsified in order to give the impression of a Kerry victory...with the hopes of propelling Kerry to victory.
So we do in fact know that polls (in this case exist polls) are SOMETIMES falsified and deliberately distorted. Problem is, though, that in 2008...as you correctly note...the polls were correct on the outcome and the good ones were correct on teh margin (ie, Rasmussen).
A final point: most of the polls did in fact underestimate what McCain finally got. So, some of the pre-election day analysis that said McCain’s vote was underreported turned out to be correct...just not correct enough.
So what’s the action item? I suppose my take away, personally, is simply to watch Rasmussen, which I do.
And by Rasmussen, Romney has NOT won as of today.
Hopefully next week will bring positive movement.
The RCP average was very close to the actual result.
Absent other evidence, I believe the best turnout model is somewhere between the 2004 presidential and the 2010 midterm. The electorate won’t have the GOP dominance of 2010 since it is a presidential year, but we should exceed the GOP percentage of 2004.
Relying on 2008 is a joke.
if they turn out is closer to what happened in2010 (and WE CONTROL THAT) then Morris is correct
“Absent other evidence, I believe the best turnout model is somewhere between the 2004 presidential and the 2010 midterm. The electorate won’t have the GOP dominance of 2010 since it is a presidential year, but we should exceed the GOP percentage of 2004.
Relying on 2008 is a joke.”
I disagree. Why shouldn’t turnout be at 2010 levels or more for the republicans? I was mad as hell in 2010, and couldn’t wait to vote. Even though Zero was not on the ballot, I was part of the wave that helped overturn the House.
I thought I was fired up in 2010, but that was nothing to the rage I feel against Zero and his regime now. We have had F&F, Obamacare passed, presidential decrees getting rid of work requirements for welfare, no added security at our embassies on Sept. 11, blaming it all on a video, and Zero not bothering to attend security briefings or meet with Bibi but being able to fit Letterman, Jayzee, and Beyonce into his schedule.... I know that there is a wave of rage even bigger than what was felt in 2010.
And if we turn out as we did in 2010, it’s all over for Zero. The lame-streams know this, and they are shamelessly doing everything in their power to make republicans think it is already over for Romney with these crap polls that over-sample Dims.
I dont give a DAMN about what the MSM, the misguided celebrities, or the weighted polls say I believe the American spirit will prevail
Hell yes, I lie all the time.
I've been polled many times this year and when it is an automated phone poll {press 1 for this and 2 for that} I am a female, black or latino, young 18-28, registered demonRAT, undecided or voting for Romney or obama but I never tell the truth.
Piss in the pollsters breakfast cereal.
When pretty much ALL the polls are going against you, you're losing. There are 9 polls in the RCP average today, Romney is losing 8 of them and tied in 1.
Dick Morris is simply telling conservatives what they want to hear. Right now a positive message is probably the best thing for us, but I wouldn't put any stock in any prediction Dick Morris makes. He owes O'Reilly like a dozen steak dinners for all the times he's been wrong just between those two.
This election should have been a referendum on the incumbent, instead it's boiling down to a choice. "Referendum" gave us our best chance to win. "Choice" means voters pick who they personally like better - unfortunately they really, really still want to like Obama.
Yeah, I’m thinking I recently heard Jim Geraghty say that the undecided vote broke 50/50 in 2004.
I agree with Morris's conclusion, but "Under State.?"
Dick, it's one word -- "understate." I know, it's tough running a one-man show, but hire an editor part-time.
I am with you on that one....
Under which State?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.