Posted on 02/02/2016 6:14:48 AM PST by justlittleoleme
The final days of Iowa polling had a cohesive set of predictions. Donald Trump was supposed to win. Marco Rubio was supposed to come in a distant third. And Bernie Sanders, despite a last-minute challenge to Hillary Clinton, was expected to narrowly lose.
Now we know the polls got it wrong, particularly on the Republican side. Trump lost to Ted Cruz and barely eked out a second-place showing over Rubio. Sanders and Clinton are still locked in virtual tie for first.
The Iowa caucuses are notoriously difficult to predict. But even the final Des Moines Register poll, which has a good record, missed Rubio's rise and Trump's fall. Here are three factors that help explain why the polls got it wrong this time around.
A bigger turnout was supposed to help Trump, but it didn't
Republicans turned out to vote in huge numbers: 185,000 people went to the caucuses, up 5.4 percent from 2012, according to the Washington Post. According to conventional wisdom going into the vote, a big turnout should have helped Trump by proving he could motivate the infrequent voters who were among his strongest supporters.
But it wasn't enough. While about 45 percent of Republican caucus-goers were caucusing for the first time, only about 30 percent of those new voters supported Trump, according to exit polls. So the new voter turnout wasn't a groundswell in his favor.
Observers had been warning that Trump's ground game — the network of volunteers and organizers doing the crucial, down-to-earth work of making sure supporters show up to the polls — was disorganized or nonexistent. On January 13, the New York Times' Trip Gabriel called the campaign's Iowa operation "amateurish and halting":
As temperatures plunged to single digits over the weekend, canvassers for Hillary Clinton posted photographs of themselves on social media going door to door in the snow. Meanwhile, Mr. Trump’s volunteers in Davenport, a city where the campaign appears to be better organized than elsewhere, decided it was too cold to go out.
Seven volunteers worked the phones at the Iowa headquarters of Senator Marco Rubio of Florida in a Des Moines suburb one night last week. At the state headquarters of Mr. Cruz, there were 24 volunteers in a room beneath a sign proclaiming a daily goal of making 6,000 calls. The Trump state headquarters in West Des Moines were largely deserted.
Trump ended up losing Davenport, too, to Rubio.
Evangelical Christians turned out to vote for Cruz
The Des Moines Register poll estimated that 47 percent of caucus attendees would be evangelical Christians. When the pollster changed the model for bigger evangelical attendance, it found Cruz would pull even with Trump if 60 percent of voters were evangelical.
Even that turned out to be an underestimate: 62 percent of caucusgoers described themselves as evangelical or born-again, according to exit polls. And the plurality of their votes went to Cruz. Less religious voters supported Trump.
In the end, according to exit polls, it was most important to caucus-goers that their candidate share their values. And among those voters, Cruz won. Trump won voters who wanted a candidate who "tells it like it is" and "can bring needed change." Rubio won voters who thought electability was most important.
The best poll suggested Cruz had hidden support
The Des Moines Register poll has a better track record than most. It predicted Howard Dean's loss in 2004 and Obama's victory in 2008. But this year, pollster Ann Selzer still found a Trump victory was likely. And the poll got it wrong in other ways: it found Cruz's support was falling and that Trump's was solid.
Still, buried in the details of the poll was enthusiasm for Cruz and Rubio.
Iowa Republicans said they were more enthusiastic about both candidates than they were about Trump, and that Cruz had more knowledge and experience than Trump. A last-minute switch would benefit Cruz, the poll found. And Republicans polled said they'd pick Trump over Cruz in a head-to-head matchup.
To some observers, that boded well for Cruz. They turned out to be right.
Silent majority is still very alive and well. Revival’s coming. People feel the social and moral rot around us, know it’s wrong.
I just prefer substance over seminary.
Steve King was on with Laura Ingraham earlier this morning.
When asked about the tactics, King spun it like crazy.
He actually tried to play the “we were just concerned for all those poor Carson supporters. We were just trying to spread the word, so they didn’t waste their votes.”
That’s pretty low. And King is supposedly one of the good guys?
Amazing that the Carson people wouldn’t let their own people know the status of the campaign.
How nice of the Cruz people to help out those poor Carson supporters. (s)
Because Trump hasn’t condescendingly pandered to Christians... /s
I despise these TV preacher hoaxsters. It turns me off when I see anyone act like them.
So it turns out that Trump drawing larger crowds doesn't mean that he has more supporters.
Lol. Let’s just say I’ve always wondered why God didn’t put an “On/Off” switch on the Testosterone Aquaduct, you know, for situations that require clear-headed thinking. :)
Carson looks like he is out. Iowans need to know before they vote. Most will go to Cruz, I hope. https://t.co/lW5Js50EMA— Steve King (@SteveKingIA) February 2, 2016
Dynoman: “I believe everything I read on social media as an EXACT account of how it happened!”
Read 148. It confirms social media accounts.
It is what it is - own it.
Don’t make it about me, it is not about me. It’s about Cruz’s political status quo crap. I actually thought he was above it but he’s not.
Check out 148 for substance, and confirmation.
LOL - this again? Same sh!t, different wrapper. The memo has even been posted on this thread.
The article says EXACTLY what the memo says (except for the inferences about “hinting”) - the memo says EXACTLY what it says - EXACTLY what the news reported: Carson announced a break, time off, and a big announcement.
Those are ALL things a candidate does before suspending their campaign. Pardon the Cruz folks for making the OBVIOUS assumption based on the moronic actions of Carson *just before the caucus*.
But, I’m done. You can’t be convinced by logic. You’re brain is locked in a conclusion that is absolutely false, but unchangeable.
Enjoy your day.
I believe Cruz was talking to a group of evangelicals. That's certainly a proper context to be speaking like that. It's not like Cruz was talking to a mixed audience.
I can certainly understand that; there are too many charlatans, for sure.
I tend to think Cruz is sincere... Could be wrong of course - politicians being what they are - but that is my opinion so far.
That said, in NH I expect Cruz to be consistent in his religious beliefs while playing up some of his more libertarian aspects to contrast with Trump. I expect to hear about eminent domain, the NSA, healthcare, etc.
Either that or he needs to become more organized and effective in getting them to the voting booths.
Carson "looked like" he was out.
>> Iâve always wondered why God didnât put an âOn/Offâ switch on the Testosterone Aquaduct
Creator GOD, our Heavenly Father, is male. Count your blessings; He COULD have put in a testosterone reservoir* and a booster pump. ;-)
*probably would have been located in our head, further reducing male capacity for thought. :-)
Denial is a river on FR.
Pretty sad to see people defend someone who was supposed to be above this kind of political status quo crap. Would expect it from Trump but he’s turned out to be way more honorable than Cruz. Amazing. He didn’t do anything like this on caucus night - if he had it would be all over the media by now.
Cruz just gave Trump some potent ammunition - a real stupid let alone unethical move.
>> Carson “looked like” he was out.
Since the day he joined the race!
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.