Comments on: Polling the polls: are they gibberish?

By: Donna

Donna — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 15:55:53 +0000

We have to remember the purpose of the polls: to make people think that they will be in a minority if they don’t vote for the favoriate. After weeks and months of publishing that Obama is ahead in the polls, they hope they many people will vote for him just to go along with the majority. Most people don’t like to be a minority. But let’s hope the people they are trying to influence either are immune or won’t vote anyway.

I was recently called and asked this “unbiased” questions: Do you think the police should be arresting people for medicinal marijuana use instead of going after dangerous criminals? I said yes, and the pollster sounded very disappointed when saying thank you and hung up.

But how do you answer a question like that? Instead of? Of course not, but if I said no they would have recorded it as a yes for medicinal marijuana, so hopefully beat them at their own game.

By: Terrye

Terrye — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 01:42:07 +0000

That LA Times poll had Democrats outnumbering Republicans about two to one. That is just ridiculous.

And even then Obama could not get to 50%. Strange.

Newsweek was much the same. They just make sure there is a demographic advantage. It makes all the difference.

I think Obama might well be ahead right now, but not so much.

By: A Berman

A Berman — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:43:34 +0000

I think that one must take into account the possibility that the definition of “likely voter” may not be accurate for this election. Obama has energized certain categories of voters who may vote at much higher percentages than previous elections.

By: RedWolverine

RedWolverine — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 18:38:09 +0000

The Gallup is a tracking poll. It has been consistent and moved within a much shorter range. The newsweek poll is garbage.

By: tim maguire

tim maguire — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:02:12 +0000

I don’t have a land line phone. Neither do a growing number of people, especially the young–polls mean less and less with each passing year.

By: joe Maller

joe Maller — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 06:51:58 +0000

They’ve probably attempted to poll me, but I hang up after hearing the machine click on and before the person starts talking.

By: Lem

Lem — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 03:32:16 +0000

I have never been galloped

By: Roy Lofquist

Roy Lofquist — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 02:21:58 +0000

1948 – “Dewey Beats Truman”

2004 – “Kerry Beats Bush” – exit polls no less.

And yes, I do remember the 1948 headlines.

Ninety eight percent of the news is either polls or pretty blonds in trouble.

I think I’ll wait for the real poll.

By: Karl

Karl — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 02:14:46 +0000

I thank dre for recommending me. The Gallup Tracking Poll was close even during the periods covered by Newsweek and the LAT. The difference appears to be in the sampling. Though most polls show a party ID shift toward the Dems, the samples for the outliers are skewed even more than that. Plus in one (the LAT, iirc) the sample skews quite young.

This actually points to a problem pollsters have had this cycle and will have thru Nov. In estimating likely voters, how will the account for young voters (esp. first timers) and the “enthusiasm gap” (if it lasts to Nov.)? Usually, likely voter screens downplay younger voters (as they are largely based on past voting) — and there is no real way of knowing if that underestimates Obama’s strength this time.

Hope that’s helpful.

By: Steve

Steve — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 01:21:05 +0000

John Allen Paulos writes well about innumeracy. I am not sure if he has examined the problem with polls, but no doubt he could provide a thoughtful and entertaining article.