or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Gallup At It Again: Yesterday's Poll Had 12% GOP Bias
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Gallup At It Again: Yesterday's Poll Had 12% GOP Bias

post #1 of 32
Thread Starter 
If I remember correctly, wasn't there a shitstorm on this board when the LA Times ran one poll with party ID skewed a bit too much towards Democrats?

___


Gallup has done it again. After supplying CNN and USA Today with a poll two weeks ago that showed a double-digit Bush lead amongst likely voters that turned out to have a significant bias in its sample favoring the GOP, Gallup did it again yesterday.

Except that yesterday, they not only did it again, they apparently felt that a 7% GOP bias wasn't good enough. So they perpetrated the same fraud upon the media (including their partners CNN and USAT) and voters and this time used a 12% GOP bias in their likely voter screen. I kid you not.

Here is the text from the email I got from Gallup this morning outlining the party ID breakdown in their likely voter samples from their two most recent national polls:

Likely Voter Sample Party IDs Poll of September 13-15
Reflected Bush Winning by 55%-42%

Total Sample: 767
GOP: 305 (40%)
Dem: 253 (33%)
Ind: 208 (28%)

Likely Voter Sample Party IDs Poll of September 24-26
Reflected Bush Winning by 52%-44%

Total Sample: 758
GOP: 328 (43%)
Dem: 236 (31%)
Ind: 189 (25%)

Looking at this, again I have a simple question: how can anyone, especially USA Today and CNN, let alone the rest of the media take a Gallup national poll seriously when Gallup knowingly puts a poll out there for consumption with a 12% GOP bias in its likely voter sample that everyone knows does not exist in the country today or at any time in the last three presidential elections?
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #2 of 32
It's pretty obvious that you don't understand statistics. Adjustments are built in all the time for these things. It's like with the VNS exit polls...they always overestimated the strength of the Democratic candidate and no one ever knew why, so they had to compensate for it in their models.

I think this issue needs more fact and less knee jerking. Somehow I think Gallup isn't exactly a fly by night organization. They certainly have more credibility than the LAT. Think about what you're saying: Gallup is biased? Finally, there are other polls that give Bush an even bigger lead. When we take averages, it shows Bush up solidly.

Or, maybe this is a case of shooting the messenger. Kerry is going down in flames, and now I guess we have to start discrediting one of the most reputable polling firms in the country.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #3 of 32
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
Kerry is going down in flames, ...

Now a dead heat is "going down in flames." Who's frothing at the mouth now?
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #4 of 32
Quote:
Originally posted by Northgate
Who's frothing at the mouth now?

Most of the people who post in this forum.
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. - Albert Einstein

I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would...
Reply
post #5 of 32
Quote:
Originally posted by rageous
Most of the people who post in this forum.

Wow, good retort. Can I use this sometime in the future?

Anywho, SDW how many stats classes have you had? I've had a few and I can tell you that altering you statistical model from sample to sample invalidates cross sample comparisons; moreover, altering a statistical model midway through a sample period invalidates all previous samples and draws all future samples into question. Did Gallup get new data previously lost since the last election not available to zogby or other pollsters? No. Redefining a population distribution from one week to the next is plain and simple--incorrect methodology.
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #6 of 32
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
Think about what you're saying: Gallup is biased?

Yes, Gallup is biased.

They're obviously getting even more so. A 43-31% split favoring Reps? Not in my universe. There is zero evidence to support that statistic, historical or current. And no, SDW, there are no "other polls" that show an even bigger lead - every other major poll shows a much tigher race. Only Gallup has such nerve to manipulate numbers. Once again, I'm astounded by the assumption certain people have that we're all blathering idiots. But it's on the front page of CNN for every sheep to read, "Bush Leads Pre-Debate Poll".
post #7 of 32
Hmmm I wonder where realclear stands: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Pre.../ia_polls.html

I'm pointing out Iowa because the "top" polls give Bush 6 pt leads while the majority of polls taken give Kerry the lead. Also, NyTimes has this little tidbit: http://nytimes.com/2004/09/28/politi...28iowa.html?hp

Bush is in trouble. Most polls have him a gnats hair above Kerry and we have a debate coming up in a couple of days. Bush will do alright because they, kerry and Bush, have the questions already and are ready with the canned responses; however, Kerry will throw out grenade after grenade which Bush will have to jump on. What does Bush have: Kerry's a flip-flopper?
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #8 of 32
Quote:
Originally posted by Northgate
Likely Voter Sample Party IDs Poll of September 13-15
Reflected Bush Winning by 55%-42%

Total Sample: 767
GOP: 305 (40%)
Dem: 253 (33%)
Ind: 208 (28%)

Likely Voter Sample Party IDs Poll of September 24-26
Reflected Bush Winning by 52%-44%

Total Sample: 758
GOP: 328 (43%)
Dem: 236 (31%)
Ind: 189 (25%)

So what's the conclusion about why this is happening? How do their models come up with so many more Repubs than Dems? Do other polls have different results (in terms of party affiliation)? Does Gallup actually weight according to party, or is it just the by-product of some other weighting they do? It sure does seem like Gallup is a big outlier. But why?
post #9 of 32
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
Bush is in trouble. Most polls have him a gnats hair above Kerry and we have a debate coming up in a couple of days. Bush will do alright because they, kerry and Bush, have the questions already and are ready with the canned responses; however, Kerry will throw out grenade after grenade which Bush will have to jump on. What does Bush have: Kerry's a flip-flopper?

I agree with your assessment. All Bush has is "flip-flop".

But Bush was won every single debate he's been in. How do we (Dems) effectively counter that? I'm not sure we can.

The big problem, as I see it, is that Democrats trust the American populace too much. "We" believe that Americans are generally well informed, intelligent and will vote accordingly.

WRONG!

Republicans have it right. They understand that Americans are exactly the opposite. They know that we sleepwalk through life, that we only understand sound-bites and clever colloquialisms, and that we're generally ignorant.

THAT's who George Bush is speaking to at the debate. Bush and only Bush has the ability to distill his rhetoric into simple sound bites. Primarily because he's physically incapable of much more than and secondarily because he's turned his biggest liability into his single best strength.

Bush doesn't do nuance. That's why sleepwalking Americans love him. That's all they understand.

I'm a Democrat. I believe the American public will wake up just enough to pull this election in our favor and serve up the single best political upset in history. But I'm an optimist...hence liberal....which is why I will be disappointed in the outcome yet again.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #10 of 32
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
Hmmm I wonder where realclear stands: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Pre.../ia_polls.html

I'm pointing out Iowa because the "top" polls give Bush 6 pt leads while the majority of polls taken give Kerry the lead. Also, NyTimes has this little tidbit: http://nytimes.com/2004/09/28/politi...28iowa.html?hp

Bush is in trouble. Most polls have him a gnats hair above Kerry and we have a debate coming up in a couple of days. Bush will do alright because they, kerry and Bush, have the questions already and are ready with the canned responses; however, Kerry will throw out grenade after grenade which Bush will have to jump on. What does Bush have: Kerry's a flip-flopper?

You're forgetting the first debate is done by Fox News and the town hall debate's audience is selected by Gallop.

If anything, these rigged debates will help Bush.
post #11 of 32
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Existence
You're forgetting the first debate is done by Fox News and the town hall debate's audience is selected by Gallop.

If anything, these rigged debates will help Bush.

I was wondering the same thing.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #12 of 32
Quote:
Originally posted by Northgate
I agree with your assessment. All Bush has is "flip-flop".

But Bush was won every single debate he's been in. How do we (Dems) effectively counter that? I'm not sure we can.

The big problem, as I see it, is that Democrats trust the American populace too much. "We" believe that Americans are generally well informed, intelligent and will vote accordingly.

WRONG!

Republicans have it right. They understand that Americans are exactly the opposite. They know that we sleepwalk through life, that we only understand sound-bites and clever colloquialisms, and that we're generally ignorant.

THAT's who George Bush is speaking to at the debate. Bush and only Bush has the ability to distill his rhetoric into simple sound bites. Primarily because he's physically incapable of much more than and secondarily because he's turned his biggest liability into his single best strength.

Bush doesn't do nuance. That's why sleepwalking Americans love him. That's all they understand.

I'm a Democrat. I believe the American public will wake up just enough to pull this election in our favor and serve up the single best political upset in history. But I'm an optimist...hence liberal....which is why I will be disappointed in the outcome yet again.

Here's a good read: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/26/po...26vote.html?hp

Dems are doing footwork while Bush is resting on hist loyalty oath signing laurels. I disagree that Bush has won all his debates. He lost against Gore in one debate when substance was involved. He won because he belittled Gore on a technicality--Gore was crowding Bush.

Kerry won't make that mistake. Kerry will drop bombs and Bush will have to defuse them. Kerry's running on change--Bush is running on his record. Bush's record is limited at best IMO.
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #13 of 32
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
Here's a good read: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/26/po...26vote.html?hp

Dems are doing footwork while Bush is resting on hist loyalty oath signing laurels. I disagree that Bush has won all his debates. He lost against Gore in one debate when substance was involved. He won because he belittled Gore on a technicality--Gore was crowding Bush.

Kerry won't make that mistake. Kerry will drop bombs and Bush will have to defuse them. Kerry's running on change--Bush is running on his record. Bush's record is limited at best IMO.

God I hope you're right.

Unfortunatley, Republicans in Ohio are successfully getting applications tossed out over an obscure technicality involving card stock weight.

Diebold will handle the rest.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #14 of 32
Further analysis for Bush lovers:

last week Bush led Kerry by 13% with a 7% bias. This week Bush leads Kerry by 8% with a 12% bias. Lets develop a lead-to-bias ratio so we can analyze the two weeks results and quantitate Bush lead a little better shall we:

13%/7%=1.857

8%/12%=0.6667

That means Bush lost 2/3's of his lead to bias figure in one week. Either this is not good for Bush, or Gallup is actually trying to correct a disparity in their methodology.

Funny how Gallup has biased MORE this week (which is probably a result of the overall analysis) while Bush's lead has been reduced. What's gonna happen next week? Are we going to see a 3%/17% lead to bias? Odd how Bush's lead shrunk by 5% while his bias went up by the same amount.
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #15 of 32
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
Here's a good read: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/26/po...26vote.html?hp

Dems are doing footwork while Bush is resting on hist loyalty oath signing laurels. I disagree that Bush has won all his debates. He lost against Gore in one debate when substance was involved. He won because he belittled Gore on a technicality--Gore was crowding Bush.

Kerry won't make that mistake. Kerry will drop bombs and Bush will have to defuse them. Kerry's running on change--Bush is running on his record. Bush's record is limited at best IMO.

What are the debates? A test in logic or how the message is delivered? If the test was knowledge and the most logical program Kerry had Bush by the nut-sack. But it isn´t your political science and philosophy teachers judging the candidates and thank you for that. Even if it is to the disadvantage of the candidate my political views are closest to (In the same sense as I am closer to the statue of liberty than New York) its better this way. Unless you are on the "Go Team"-team.
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
post #16 of 32
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
Further analysis for Bush lovers:

last week Bush led Kerry by 13% with a 7% bias. This week Bush leads Kerry by 8% with a 12% bias. Lets develop a lead-to-bias ratio so we can analyze the two weeks results and quantitate Bush lead a little better shall we:

13%/7%=1.857

8%/12%=0.6667

That means Bush lost 2/3's of his lead to bias figure in one week. Either this is not good for Bush, or Gallup is actually trying to correct a disparity in their methodology.

Funny how Gallup has biased MORE this week (which is probably a result of the overall analysis) while Bush's lead has been reduced. What's gonna happen next week? Are we going to see a 3%/17% lead to bias? Odd how Bush's lead shrunk by 5% while his bias went up by the same amount.

Good point, faust9. Let me follow up. Most polls show that 90% of people who express a party affiliation will vote for that party's candidate. Based on that, break down Gallup's numbers:
Code:


Sept. 13-15: Sept. 24-26:
Bush Kerry Bush Kerry
Reps 40 36 4 Reps 43 39 4
Dems 33 3 30 Dems 31 3 28
Ind 27 16 8 Ind 25 10 12
Total 55 42 Total 52 44


Now, re-adjust for parity (still not realistic, but closer) while maintaining the same vote distribution among independents:
Code:


Sept. 13-15: Sept. 24-26:
Bush Kerry Bush Kerry
Reps 33 30 3 Reps 33 30 3
Dems 33 3 30 Dems 33 3 30
Ind 33 22 11 Ind 33 15 18
Total 55 44 Total 48 51


Finally, what if you use a realistic 40-33 Dem advantage?
Code:


Sept. 13-15: Sept. 24-26:
Bush Kerry Bush Kerry
Reps 33 30 3 Reps 33 30 3
Dems 40 4 36 Dems 40 4 36
Ind 27 18 9 Ind 27 12 15
Total 52 48 Total 46 54



Any way you look at it, Bush is slipping, and badly. Especially among independents. Cany you see how dramatically the independent vote changed between the two polls? It went from 2-1 in favor of Bush to 6-5 in favor of Kerry. That's why they had to bump up the number of Republcans again.
post #17 of 32
Quote:
Originally posted by Anders
What are the debates? A test in logic or how the message is delivered?

According to our media, the debates are about deciding which candidate you'd rather have a beer with.
post #18 of 32
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell
According to our media, the debates are about deciding which candidate you'd rather have a beer with.

Then I suggest a new format. A bar, the ingredients for long island ice tea, a host disguised as bartender and two chairs. After each statement the candidate says "Cheers!" and finish his drink. That I would like to see
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
post #19 of 32
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
It's pretty obvious that you don't understand statistics. Adjustments are built in all the time for these things. It's like with the VNS exit polls...they always overestimated the strength of the Democratic candidate and no one ever knew why, so they had to compensate for it in their models.

I think this issue needs more fact and less knee jerking. Somehow I think Gallup isn't exactly a fly by night organization. They certainly have more credibility than the LAT. Think about what you're saying: Gallup is biased? Finally, there are other polls that give Bush an even bigger lead. When we take averages, it shows Bush up solidly.

Or, maybe this is a case of shooting the messenger. Kerry is going down in flames, and now I guess we have to start discrediting one of the most reputable polling firms in the country.


SDW, Your posts are the only place on the internet that I've read anything close to " Kerry's going down in flames ".
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #20 of 32
The desparation of the anti-Bush camp is at a frenzy. After Rathergate gutted the Kerry camp faster than a bubba can gut a deer, they seem to have just lost it. Flip Flop Flip Flop ! Bush lied about this ! Bush lied about that! Where are the WMD?!
Listen to me please. Most Americans don't care about this nonsense. We want a strong President who stands by his guns and has the guts do what needs to be done. Even the suburban woman who tend toward the Dems are leaving Kerry because they doubt he has the fortitude to defend America.

No flip flop here. Bush 55% Kerry 45% as I have said for months.

Moe L
"A more sensitive and caring Common man for 2005"
Reply
"A more sensitive and caring Common man for 2005"
Reply
post #21 of 32
Quote:
Originally posted by Common Man
Where are the WMD?!
Listen to me please. Most Americans don't care about this nonsense.

The Bush RDF is on full power, I see. WMDs have been demoted from casus belli to "nonsense". Were they also "nonsense" in March 2003? I seem to recall we rather cared about them back then. By extension, I suppose this whole "war" is "nonsense" as well. "Dead people", "insurgents", "bombs", all "nonsense" not worthy of "debate".

Let's talk about what matters. The real issue. Terror. Take Osama bin...erm, yeah. I mean, Osama Who?
post #22 of 32
Quote:
Originally posted by Common Man
We want a strong President who stands by his guns and has the guts do what needs to be done.

I can't just leave that hanging there, either. Let's see, off the top of my head...

President Bush:
1. Opposed creation of a 9/11 commission
2. Refused to testify, or permit any aids to testify, before the 9/11 commission
3. Opposed federalization of aiport screeners
4. Opposed extension of international control outside Kabul
5. Opposed creation of a Department of Homeland Security
6. Opposed creation of a commission to look into intelligence failures leading up to the Iraq War
7. Opposed every one of the recommendations of that intelligence commission, including creation of a real NDI


Those are just a few major issues of National Security that Bush took a "strong" stand on. It was the wrong stand, of course, in every case. Fortunately, in every case he flip-flopped like a salmon trying to swim up a ladder. You can stay tucked away in your RDF, or you can open your eyes and see reality - a weak, petty, yet arrogant man, who (oddly) tells people what he wants to hear.
post #23 of 32
Thread Starter 
Oh, Common Man, you crack me up.

So just in case you thought George W. Bush was just a regular guy from Texas...

Remember...George W. Bush was born in Connecticut and he went to a private boarding school...where he was the HEAD CHEERLEADER!


"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #24 of 32
I read an article today that was talking about huge increases in voter registrations that I have to think will help Kerry. At least one can hope........I find it rather sad and pathetic that 750 people out of what 280 million? can be asked their opinion and its given this much play. Polling should be banned.
post #25 of 32
USAToday runs Gallup defense

USAToday went to Gallup to get the story on their sampling and how it comes into play with regard to their results.

Gallup made a couple points which Northgate, Faust and others fail to mention.

First Gallup, doesn't adjust the poll for party representation. They simply ask the party representation of the people in the poll. Second, they believe that people can change the party they most identify with as easily as they do their political vote. Also that if you use a previous poll to determine how you shape the current poll, you basically double your margin of error.



Quote:
Actually, it's what Gallup doesn't do that is at the heart of the debate. The polling firm does not adjust its "pool" of voters to add or subtract Republicans or Democrats in an effort to mirror those parties' estimated make-ups.

Among the reasons Gallup doesn't try to do that:

It believes there are no reliable data on which to estimate exactly how many Republicans or Democrats there are in the country. Some states, for example, don't require voters to register by party affiliation. Basing an adjustment on previous year's exit polls, "means you're 'weighting' one poll based on the results of another poll, which has its own built-in sampling error," Newport said.

It believes party affiliation "is an attitude, not a demographic trait" and that voters can change their minds about which party they identify with more than once during an election year, Newport said. That would explain, he said, why the number of people who identified themselves as Republicans went down during this year's Democratic primaries when Kerry and his competitors were in the news.

Also take note that Gallup is not alone....

Quote:
Most polling firms use the same methods as Gallup when identifying party affiliations. Among those are the surveys done by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. Andrew Kohut, the center's director, said in a statement last week that "important shifts in voter sentiment" could be missed if pollsters tried to apply rigid party formulas to results.

Gallup also conveniently adds a large table of all their sampling data for this year.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #26 of 32
But they didn't address the primary allegation. The specific charge in that moveon ad (pdf file) is that something Gallup does in their calculation of likely voters biases the sample toward Republicans. It's not that they intentionally ask for more Republicans. They didn't address that issue at all.
post #27 of 32
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell
But they didn't address the primary allegation. The specific charge in that moveon ad (pdf file) is that something Gallup does in their calculation of likely voters biases the sample toward Republicans. It's not that they intentionally ask for more Republicans. They didn't address that issue at all.

Gallup's current poll shows Kerry getting more support among likely voters than it does among registered voters.

But it really seems like a straw man to me. How is being Republican or Democrat going to make you more likely to vote? I would think that the criteria that determines whether you are a likely voter would be completely independent of party. I would think that it would something along the lines of how many previous elections have you voted in, have you applied for an absentee ballot, have you moved and re-registered, or something of that nature.

Here is the Moveon contention...

Quote:
Simply put, Gallups methodology
has predicted lately that Republican
turnout on Election Day is likely to
exceed Democrats by six to eight
percentage points. But exit polls show
otherwise: in each of the last two
Presidential elections, Democratic
turnout exceeded Republican by four to
five points. That discrepancy alone can
account for nearly all of Bushs phantom 14-point lead.

I think this goes hand in hand with more people indentifying themselves as Republican after already being asked who they are going to vote for in the election. I hate being a parse master but notice the charge is that Gallup has only being doing this "lately." This is because when you look at the Gallup chart through the entire year, there are times when the poll had up to 5% more people identifying themselves as Democrats. This was especially true through the Democratic primary season when the Democrats and their message were getting lots of coverage.

They addressed it by saying they don't use a party sample to alter their poll sample because it will double the margin of error. If you have a poll that tells you the country is X% Republican and Y% Democratic with a 3-4% margin of error and you use that to change the results of another poll with a 3-4% margin of error, you've just added huge amounts of error into your polling data.

Now I'm not arguing that Gallup is the best, most accurate poll or anything like that. But they have clearly explained their methods and they seem to be above politics. If they prove to be inaccurate, they will have to change them in order to continue to receive the types of customers they do receive. But until they are proven wrong, they get the benefit of the doubt, especially over Moveon.org who seems to be willing to do anything and question or smear anyone to get the results they desire.

Here's a nice link of some historical poll results.

Polls

Note that in the last election, Rasmussen was off by over 9%. I know people cite that one here alot.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #28 of 32
Frankly, not adjusting at all for party affiliation is bizzare. Random phone calls give you a very distorted picture of the electorate. Stay-at-home wives and seniors are over-represented, and working women are hugely under-represented. Because of the greater likelihood of finding women at home to answer the phone, a pollster will always ask if a man is home, and speak to him if one is. Heck, anyone who's not at home much, or who doesn't have a landline, is also hugely under-represented. We've talked about all these factors before. Especially in an election where so much of the electorate (at least 2/3, if not 5/6) made up their minds even before Kerry was nominated, it makes little sense to not to normalize your poll numbers to try to capture that, and party affiliation has been pretty stable over the long term.

Gallup's numbers didn't just suddenly get funny - they've been favoring Bush all summer. It was just less obvious a month ago when they had Bush up by four and everyone else had Kerry up by 4. Now that everyone else has Bush up by a few, that 8-10 point Republican advantage Gallup has shown all cycle really sticks out. Time will tell just how (in)accurate they are, but it sure seems like something's fishy in their national methodology, especially if you compare their own state-by-state polls to their national numbers (scroll down to the "How Can Gallup... Game" posts).

They are still the most trusted brand-name in polls, and the most widely reported. Enough so that their poll numbers can influence the process itself. If they're showing a systematic bias this cycle, out of all historical proportion, it's a big deal.

Edit: Not just this cycle. One of the blog sites jogged my memory of their election-eve poll in 2000 that showed Bush up by 7. I can actually remember thinking how silly it was, given that poll, that all the anchors went out of their way on election night to emphasize that the race was a "tie" or a "statistical dead heat". And I remember being surprised that it really was. I didn't know at the time it was Gallup, but it was - off by 8, just like now (although their "final" poll, released after the election, showed a closer race).
post #29 of 32
Thread Starter 
Ruy is kicking serious Gallup ass over at Donky Rising:

Quote:
How can Gallup......have Bush up by 13 nationwide, when he's only up by 2 points among Florida RVs?--and according to their own poll!

How can Gallup.....have Bush up by 13 nationwide, when he's only up by 2 points among Nevada RVs?--again, according to their own poll [...]

How can Gallup.....have Bush up by 13 nationwide, when he's only leading in Montana by 18 points? (in 2000, Bush won Montana by 25 points)

How can Gallup.....have Bush up by 13 nationwide, when he's behind Kerry by 15 points in California and 20 points in New York?

How can Gallup.....have Bush tied in the solid blue states (that is, the non-battleground blue states, so WI, MN, IO etc aren't included), when he is trailing Kerry by 15 points in California and 20 points in New York?

How can Gallup.....have Bush up by 13, when he's only leading among independents by 2 (and that was exactly Bush's margin among independents in 2000 when, as you recall, he did not win the popular vote by 13 points)?

Ruy has lots more questions.

[Update] USA Today whitewashes the issue.

Quote:
Frank Newport, editor in chief of the Gallup Poll, said the critics don't understand the science behind the polls. "This issue has been the subject of intense scholarly discussion and years of research. We're confident in what we're doing," he said.

Actually, it's what Gallup doesn't do that is at the heart of the debate. The polling firm does not adjust its "pool" of voters to add or subtract Republicans or Democrats in an effort to mirror those parties' estimated make-ups.

Silly liberals. We cannot possibly hope to understand their advanced science.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #30 of 32
Quote:
Originally posted by Northgate
[Update] USA Today whitewashes the issue.

Silly liberals. We cannot possibly hope to understand their advanced science.

To my dismay, the NYTimes similarly whitewashed the issue today. It's not as quotable as the USA Today article, but the jist is nicely encapsulated in the title: "Request to Partisans: Don't Shoot the Pollster".

It tries hard to be "balanced" by describing how Matthew Dowd organized an anti-LATimes campaign when almost every poll's numbers were against Bush in the summer. No mention of how Gallup is such an outlier, and has been consistently for some time. Implies that Democrats are complaining that all polls show Bush up, when the only issue I've heard raised is Gallup. Once again, no indication there is, or should be, such a thing as objective reality, and that striving for it is not a partisan issue. I didn't expect such tripe from the NYTimes, but then I'm still young and naive.
post #31 of 32
Whoo boy, Gallup is at it again! Recent whitewashes nonwithstanding, a dramatic change to their methodology for their most recent poll resulted in Kerry erasing Bush's 8-point lead and pulling up to a 49-49 tie!

How did Bush's 8-12 point lead evaporate overnight? Gallup gave him that lead by assuming the electorate was divided 40-43% GOP vs. 31-33% Democrat. What Gallup giveth, Gallup can take away. Their new poll brings party affiliation back into our universe, assuming 39% Dem and 34% GOP. The result is finally what has probably been the reality all long - a tie.

Steve Soto of the LeftCoaster does a nice job of ripping Gallup yet another new one.

The thing that scares me is that Gallup's polls are still the most widely reported, and have a huge effect on momentum. Their Bush-favoring polls gave him an enormous boost in how the media talked about him, and now the swing towards Kerry is helping drive Kerry's new momentum. Who knows what Gallup will do next? Will they go back to their old methodology after the next debate to try to show that Bush won? Will they build Kerry up until some October surprise, then swing the poll back towards Bush? Will they keep things a tie until the final weekend, then show a huge last-minute burst of Bush support? Who knows, and I wish I could say "who the hell cares", but I have a feeling it really will matter.
post #32 of 32
Wow, another 9 point shift from Gallup. Oh wait a minute that number as touted in USA was a likely voter statistic which is exceedingly inaccurate... The RV stat only shows a 3% lead fro Bush 48% to 45%--well within the margin of error of both candidates. So, how is it Gallup can project a 9 point shift when their RV data says otherwise....

A good analysis of Gallup's us and the media's unfettered promotion of this inaccurate stat: http://www.emergingdemocraticmajorit...ves/000798.php


Also, dig the trend lines from Rassumusse reports...
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Pres...cking_Poll.htm
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Gallup At It Again: Yesterday's Poll Had 12% GOP Bias