Skip to comments.About Those Polls
Posted on 10/08/2012 10:49:56 PM PDT by neverdem
Karl Rove in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal is the latest of those of the Romneyite persuasion to call into question the remarkably consistent polling data showing President Obama with a small but significant lead over their man. Obviously, this is something one has to be careful about. I am old enough to remember when certain vocal partisans of Barry Goldwater and of George McGovern, different as they no doubt were in so many other ways, were of one mind in thinking that people must be lying to the pollsters about their voting intentions. Mr Rove is wise enough not to go down that road, but he does point — as others have done before him — to the example of 1980 when the polls showed the incumbent President Carter eight points up on challenger Ronald Reagan in late October but Reagan ended up winning by ten. He also notes that Peter Brown of Quinnipiac is himself doubtful that his poll’s finding of a nine-point Democratic advantage in Florida can be right when it was only three points four years ago.
Yet neither Mr Brown nor Mr Rove offers any theory as to what it is that could be so skewing the result, assuming it is skewed. Some Republicans blame the bias of the pollsters who deliberately "weight" their sample towards Democratic voters in order to find an advantage for the President. This seems unlikely to me, if only because sheer commercial interest would prevent them from thus undermining their own credibility. Besides, most polls don’t weight their samples by party anyway. If they randomly pick more Democrats than Republicans it’s because more Democrats than Republicans are answering their questions. But could there be some significance in the different response rates themselves? As Michael Barone pointed out in The Washington Examiner, "the Pew Research Center reports that it’s getting only nine per cent of the people it contacts to respond to its questions. That's compared with 36 percent in 1997." Why do so many people not want to talk to pollsters? And is there any reason to think that more of those who don’t are Republican than Democrat?
Mr Barone speculates:
It may be that we’re seeing the phenomenon we’ve seen for years in exit polls, which have consistently skewed Democratic (and toward Barack Obama in the 2008 primaries). Part of that is interviewer error: Exit poll pioneer Warren Mitofsky found the biggest discrepancies between exit polls and actual results were in precincts where the interviewers were female graduate students. But he also found that Democrats were simply more willing to fill out the exit poll. Which raises the question: Are we seeing the same thing in this month's polls?
I am inclined to think that the answer is yes. As someone who routinely puts the phone down as soon as I hear the words "poll" or "survey," I can understand the poll fatigue that Michael Barone blames for the low response rate, but I am also aware of a vague sense of resentment against the pollsters for being a part of the whole media culture which I assume to be unsympathetic to my political views. It therefore seems likely to me that the non-responders refuse to answer because they see pollsters as an arm of the media, which they don’t trust. That mistrust of the media, as a recent Pew study showed, is rising among the population as a whole but it is higher among Tea Party Republicans than anybody else. They are twice as likely as the general population to say that there is "a great deal" of political bias in news coverage, so why would they cooperate with those seeking to make them part of their news coverage by answering poll questions? The belief in the pollsters’ bias towards Democrats could thus become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
stupid article.... the results are meaningless because the polls ARE skewed. When one of them shows a plus 13 dems in a year where dems aren’t going to show up as much as they did in 2008 what can one say.
OK... Whatever... Sheeeese I still think they are cheating.. So there.. :)
Well... that's because they are 'seasonally adjusted' just like the unemployment figures.
re: Pew Research Center reports that its getting only nine per cent of the people it contacts to respond to its questions. That’s compared with 36 percent in 1997.” Why do so many people not want to talk to pollsters?
Well, what about caller ID? More people people have it now than 15 years ago. Personally, I like giving my opinions! But if I don’t have a spare 20 minutes, I am not inclined to give the time it takes to answer the questions. Plus, it is not clear who is calling me, I don’t answer. Back in 1997, I didn’t have caller ID. I would have answered the phone just in case it was a family member.
Yes, I took the 10 minutes to take it.
<< so something is up with all these polls. >>
You are right, and that something is $$$.
Pollsters take polls because they make money for doing so. If the results are close, they become more relevant. But, if they were to report the truth — Romney is BLOWING AWAY Obama — then who would pay them for their polls anymore?
Romney 53, Obama 46. Write it down.
53-46 is just about what I’ve been thinking. I get a little nervous about the electoral college, though, but I think 53-46 would mean Romney picked up those needed states. I so hope we’re right!
You’re right. And one Pub pollster pointed out the Pew poll that has Romney ahead today is skewed +5% Republican. There is no way that there are going to be 5% more Pubs than Dems either. So watch the independents for an accurate read, since that doesn’t change no matter how the sample is skewed. In 2008 Obama won independents by 12%. Now he is -17% to Romney. He can’t win with those numbers.
I was going to vote for obama, but after the debate, my obamaphone ran out of minutes, and they wouldn't give me another one.
Any time I am polled by a computer, they never get accurate responses.
“And one Pub pollster pointed out the Pew poll that has Romney ahead today is skewed +5% Republican.”
What are they doing! Skewed now for R’s, and after the debate will skew the other way and show obama comeback?
not fair...i now need a new keyboard and a box full of Kleenex
Interesting take since the Pew Poll shows as skewed at 0 over at unskewed polls.
One possible explanation is that people who have swung to Romney and are now identifying themselves as Republican previously were self-identifying as Dems, regardless of how they are really registered.
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.