Review of Polls

Discussion in 'Elections' started by Revolt, Nov 8, 2012.

  1. Revolt

    Revolt Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Location:
    Davis, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Country:
    United States
    Hi folks. I missed you all in the election season, but has having wayyyy to much fun on some college football boards giving the mouth breathers there a hard time. Okay, so let's look at how the pollsters did:

    [​IMG]
    http://themonkeycage.org/
    ToasterLeavins and Dr. Wankler repped this.


  2. Revolt

    Revolt Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Location:
    Davis, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Country:
    United States
    So there you have it. Lesson learned: Gallup, Rassumussen, Democracy Corps - all bad; PPP, YouGov and Ipsos/Reuters - good.

    One other thing: Polling mode (whether its RDD land line, cell phone, robo call, internet) does NOT matter. Understanding the nature of the underlying population - in this case, the voting public - is key.
    That Phat Hat repped this.
  3. JohnR

    JohnR Member+

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2000
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Good stuff. Reveals once again how damaging Fox is to the U.S. Even as the polls overall were slightly biased in favor of Republicans, Fox convinced its audience that the polls were a vast conspiracy against Republicans.

    So viewers who watched Fox were steered away from the truth, and into bitterness and disappointment and cynicism. How is that good for them or this country? Now they feel cheated, and going forward they are likely to be angrier and more partisan. Great. Just great.
  4. Revolt

    Revolt Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Location:
    Davis, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Country:
    United States


  5. Revolt

    Revolt Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Location:
    Davis, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Country:
    United States
    Well, the Republican War on Science came back and bite their own asses right off. So much for the new Republican Polling Statistics.
    GiuseppeSignori repped this.
  6. That Phat Hat

    That Phat Hat Member+

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2002
    Location:
    Just Barely Outside the Beltway
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Country:
    Japan
    It's worth pointing out that PPP, by their admission, got lucky. They kept the likely voter model the same as 2008, and that was based mostly on faith that the Obama ground game would get the votes out. There's no way to reliably model a ground game until the votes are cast.
  7. Revolt

    Revolt Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Location:
    Davis, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Country:
    United States
    And for a bellyful of laughs, Unskwedpolls.com

    These jokers had Romney winning with around 330 EVs, but I see they changed their final forecast to 275 for Romney.
  8. Revolt

    Revolt Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Location:
    Davis, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Country:
    United States
    Did PPP really say they were lucky? I think the smarter pollsters ended up assuming that the share of white voters would decline, while the Republicans assumed that minorities would not show up to the polls. Some of the better analyses I've seen have been on independents and Republicans, with an understanding that many Tea Party lunatics switched from Republican to Independent. thus, the polls with large (6-8) point Dem advantages were correct.
  9. That Phat Hat

    That Phat Hat Member+

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2002
    Location:
    Just Barely Outside the Beltway
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Country:
    Japan
    Okay, so "lucky" wasn't the word:
    But Jensen conceded that the secret to PPP’s success was what boiled down to a well informed but still not entirely empirical hunch. “We just projected that African-American, Hispanic, and young voter turnout would be as high in 2012 as it was in 2008, and we weighted our polls accordingly,” he explained. “When you look at polls that succeeded and those that failed that was the difference.” Given the methodological challenges currently confronting pollsters, those hunches are only going to prove more important. “The art part of polling, as opposed to the science part,” Jensen said, “is becoming a bigger and bigger part of the equation in having accurate polls.”

    So you're right about how they got to the likely model, but it was still a hunch, based partly on the empirical but also partly on the immeasurable - enthusiasm and effectiveness of the operation.
  10. Revolt

    Revolt Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Location:
    Davis, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Country:
    United States
    Thanks for finding that specific quote - and great point about the "hunch" - which is a good way to put the pollsters' estimates on turnout. I think that under normal election years, most of the electorate give the pollsters the benefit of the doubt on turnout models; after all, these guys are the professionals. This year was off because the Wing Nut War on Science turned its blunderbusses on polling, a lot of people really started to question the turnout models. Otherwise, I don't believe folks would have paid so much attention.
  11. tomwilhelm

    tomwilhelm Member+

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Location:
    Boston, MA, USA
    Club:
    Fulham FC
    Country:
    United States
  12. That Phat Hat

    That Phat Hat Member+

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2002
    Location:
    Just Barely Outside the Beltway
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Country:
    Japan
  13. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 1999
    Location:
    Raleigh
    Club:
    DC United
    Country:
    United States
    The reason Gallup was so wrong is that they projected the % of white voters this year to be the exact same as it was in 2010. Just right off, you KNOW that was a stupid assumption. They didn't average 2008 and 2010 or anything, just straight up used 2010. Why would you compare a presidential election t an off year election rather than the previous presidential? Makes no sense.

    Doesn't that make Gallup an organization run by incompetents?
  14. JohnR

    JohnR Member+

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2000
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Gallup didn't think that perhaps nonwhite voters might show up more if Barack Obama is on the ballot? ;)
  15. Revolt

    Revolt Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Location:
    Davis, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Country:
    United States
    No, not incompetent. They've been doing this a long time. However, they did seem rather naive. Bells should have gone off at Gallop when they were seeing their poll was a consistent outlier.

    Now, Rasmussen - that's incompetence. Or just using Republican War on Science Math.
  16. Revolt

    Revolt Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Location:
    Davis, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Country:
    United States
  17. That Phat Hat

    That Phat Hat Member+

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2002
    Location:
    Just Barely Outside the Beltway
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Country:
    Japan
    But Rasmussen's audience is prospective clients on the right. Feeding bullshit through public polls is marketing.
  18. Revolt

    Revolt Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Location:
    Davis, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Country:
    United States
    From Nate Silver:

    [​IMG]
    tomwilhelm repped this.
  19. Barbara

    Barbara Hail Grimes!

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2000
    Club:
    DC United
    Country:
    United States
    Until the internet, I had no idea how many funny people there are in this world but I'm always blown away by it.
  20. Barbara

    Barbara Hail Grimes!

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2000
    Club:
    DC United
    Country:
    United States
    dapip repped this.
  21. taosjohn

    taosjohn Member+

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Location:
    taos,nm
    I propose that you and I outlive the dumbside of our group and restore its honor over time...
  22. Funkfoot

    Funkfoot Member+

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Location:
    Manassas, VA
    The fact that we're aging doesn't mean we are required to be douchebags.
    Dyvel repped this.
  23. Dr. Wankler

    Dr. Wankler Member+

    Joined:
    May 2, 2001
    Location:
    The Electric City
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Mind if I join you?
  24. taosjohn

    taosjohn Member+

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Location:
    taos,nm
    W
    Will you feed the cats? The way my knee is going it's getting harder and harder...:cautious:
    Dr. Wankler repped this.
  25. ToasterLeavins

    ToasterLeavins Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2003
    Location:
    NJ USA
    Club:
    Everton FC
    Anyone have any idea if this is the most the polls have been off in any of the recent elections? Seems like it. If so was it mostly down to the media trying to portray a race as close that wasnt really close just for ratings or some other reason?

Share This Page