Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Gallup admits: it only releases likely voter results when they favor McCain!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 01:05 PM
Original message
Gallup admits: it only releases likely voter results when they favor McCain!

Gallup admits: it only releases likely voter results when they favor McCain!

by Dick Diver
Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 05:32:47 AM PDT

<...>

But I want to focus on the poll Gallup released last Monday, Sept. 8th, through USA Today, that used a sudden, unexplained, temporary shift to the likely voter model and caused a huge splash in the media.

That poll, taken in the three days immediately following the Republican National Convention, showed by far the largest national lead McCain has ever had in any poll (54-44 among likely voters), and generated a tremendous amount of attention. It helped drive the buzz for all of last week -- that McCain got a huge bounce from his convention, that Palin was a game-changer, that Obama was in big trouble, etc.

Notice that Gallup never released a likely voter poll over the three days immediately following the Democratic convention -- nor did it release any polls through USA Today during Obama's bounce. Putting it in USA Today guarantees far greater attention than the tracking poll alone gets.

This was a deliberate choice by Gallup and USA Today -- to release a poll that would maximize the impression of McCain's bounce and help shape the campaign narrative in favor of McCain-Palin's favor.

On Friday, Gallup published this report discussing the differences between registered and likely voters. Perhaps unintentionally, Frank Newport, the head of Gallup, made a huge admission that bears directly on the September 8th likely voter poll:

Second, we are at this point reporting likely voter estimates on only an occasional basis. We feel that the trends among registered voters give us the best way to track election preferences in our daily poll, in part because many voters are not yet in a position to accurately estimate their chances of voting on Election Day. But from time to time, we do estimate (and report) likely voter results to give us a feel for the potential difference turnout could make in November. So far this summer, there have been occasions when -- as was the case this past weekend after the GOP convention -- likely voters were decidedly more Republican. But there have also been occasions when there was little difference between the vote patterns of likely voters and those of registered voters.

In other words, Gallup is admitting the following:

  1. At the time it released the September 8th poll (showing McCain up by 10), it believed institutionally that likely voter results were less accurate than registered voter results.

  2. Likely voter results have only occasionally diverged from the registered voter results.

  3. Despite these facts, Gallup deliberately chose to release, to the widest fanfare possible, a poll using an admittedly less accurate method (the likely voter method) at the time of McCain's maximum convention bounce, knowing that it would show a large divergence (+10 for McCain vs. only +4 with registered voters) based on the likely voter method, even though such a divergence is not often present.

  4. In short, they combined all possible factors in McCain's favor to make his lead seem as big as possible -- and the media went wild with it.
more



Now, who is going to correct the distorted perception and record that these manipulations created?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NJGeek Donating Member (680 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
1. (bump) In what respect, Cherlee?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chicagoexpat Donating Member (843 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
2. John McCain Lie Counter Web Page
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MagickMuffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
3. Funny thing is I mentioned that the polls were not trustworthy in a poll a few days ago
A DUer made fun of me and tried to pick a fight. That Duer should apologize but I'm not holding my breath.

But again and I can't stress this enough but the polls are fixed. They are only targeted to a very small amount of people. And now we have one of the largest polling companies admitting they rig the system.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Well you were right. But the doctoring of the polls have been mentioned before. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mojowork_n Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. Not to mention polls this far out from Nov...
are nothing more than "horse-race journalism," as the folks at http://www.scoop.co.nz point out:

http://election08.scoop.co.nz/%E2%80%98horse-race%E2%80... /

This is actually about the national elections in New Zealand, but the analysis could be applied equally well here. (With the additional caveat that instead of just tracking bogus poll results, journalists in America are shirking a much greater responsibility in focusing on the horse race, instead of which jockeys and race horse owners are cheating and lying the most.)

we have some 55 more days of media noise about who is ahead, who is closing fast, who is coming up through the pack, who is surprisingly off the pace, and which one of oh, about 68 niche voting segments may prove decisive in the final sprint to the finish line. Not to mention how the latest polls are showing the race is tightening and the gap is narrowing. Or not. And November 8 will start the whole cycle all over again if any residual doubt remains on election night as to who can form a government.

Journalism that analyses the process of politics rather than its content has recognizable features. Most of them foster the myth that the media has inside knowledge, or reliable predictive power about how the election process will unfold. They/we usually dont. They/we are usually groping in the dark as mere spectators, not as insiders. Were guessing, being spun, and are spinning the public in turn at best on the basis of hand signals from the coaches for Team Labour and Team National, and at worst on sheer bluff and hedging our bets. Some features of horse race journalism you can expect to see a lot more of during the next 55 days

1. Subjunctive forecasting. Those little words may and if are the political journalists best friends. John Armstrongs Herald column on Saturday offered both a preview of campaign racecourse conditions - track likely to be ugly and nasty, much dirt expected and this excellent example of subjunctive forecasting :

Keys political instincts are solid. But they will tempt him to take some risks. Some may pay off. But he will make mistakes. They wont matter if they are minor. They will if they are major.

Right, that just about covers the possible options. Those solid political instincts of Keys may lead him to act like a flake, but that wont matter to the outcome, unless it does. Or unless he is an alien, which is a possibility some insiders say cannot be ruled out entirely at this time.

2. Polls as moral arbiters. Since to the media, the campaign race is the story, opinion polls become a palpable reality that provides a running verdict on success or failure. However, the polls are mute on the reasons for the trends they record, and on how the politicians feel about them. Therefore, the medias role will be to helpfully flesh out the polls, and cloak the players with moral dimensions in their alleged reactions to them...

...

3. The Experts Say. To convey the sense of insiderdom and status as founts of special wisdom, the media will tap its expert sources. Very special, extremely savvy sources. So, watch out for : insiders say. or well placed sources say, or an unnamed source close to the party confirms. Often, this means simply the journalist has agreed to be spun by the party machine, for purposes of its own. Dont get me wrong. Access is necessary for some stories. Thats certainly what a press pass does provide you. It gets you conditional entry to the political locker room, where unless youre very sharp you readily become a conduit for the worldview of the players and their coaches. Staying outside is just as important for the readers, though it is not as highly valued by media managers.

4. The Jump Cut and the Hedged Bet To convey a sense of mastery the media will sometimes make a bold prediction. This is usually a leap in the dark masquerading as insider knowledge. Usually, it has about as much factual underpinning as a bet on red eleven on the roulette wheel at Vegas...




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MagickMuffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. Horse-race journalism is exactly what we're dealing with here
They have to make us Think there IS a Horse-race, however, when I watch Obama rallies I know that the people there aren't just there for the fun of it. Especially when they have to wait in line for hours before they are even allowed in. They are there because they have lost hope and are ready for change.

When I went to see him in Fort Worth I stood in line for a couple of hours, and the crowd kept growing behind me. The convention center only holds 17/18,000 and we had a spill over crowd. Obama even went to address them as well as the larger group.


I have never been polled, so I'm curious as what kind of questions they ask the voter.

I wouldn't be surprised if they ask very leading questions.

I have also checked Real Clear Politics website for polling data, usually there are a very small fraction of people being polled. I guess that's why I don't put a lot of credit in them.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 01:45 PM
Response to Original message
4. If the polls are biased
they will lull the repukes into a false sense of security. McCain will take in less money and fewer people will volunteer. The Obama supporters, OTOH, will step up to the plate and donate and do whatever it takes to get our man back on top. I think some of this was evident in the August fundraising numbers where Obama absolutely trounced McCain.

So if a pollster supports McCain, biasing his polls in McCain's favor is about the stupidest thing he can do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mojowork_n Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #4
12. No, I respectfully disagree. Fudging the poll numbers is also
an essential element in stealing the vote count, on election day. They have to maintain the fiction that their candidate might have actually won fair and square.

The thugs *know* they're a minority, so sending out phony applications for absentee ballots, caging voters, requiring photo ID, making sure there aren't enough voting machines in low income precincts are all part and parcel of their overall campaign strategy.

The big campaign donors are all aware of what's going on, so they're certainly not lulled into any false sense of security.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mojowork_n Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #4
13. Oops, double post. Deleting the second. n/t
Edited on Mon Sep-15-08 02:01 PM by mojowork_n
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dansolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #4
20. No, it is just the opposite
If it looks like McCain may be close to beating Obama, Republicans are more likely to be active. They would be a lot more demoralized if he was consistently trailing Obama by a wide margin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
5. Gallup is afflicted with the disease that is destroying this country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #5
16. Yeah, it's called
dishonesty or Republicanitis.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
7. They're trying to inflat mccain to deflat the enthusiasm of us
but what I'm seeing instead is it is motivating us more - just the opposite of what they are aiming for. So hopefully we have enough to overcome any rigging they'll do at polls.

I think the White House is really afraid of prison and doing what they can to help mccain...now...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EnviroBat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 01:50 PM
Response to Original message
8. Yep, and RASMUSSEN is a RW fundie.
The Polls are bullshit and a propaganda tool.

Wake UP! You are being manipulated...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
walldude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 01:53 PM
Response to Original message
9. "likely voters were decidedly more Republican"
So they are saying that among the "likely voting republicans" McCain only wins by 10%... :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 01:55 PM
Response to Original message
11. In a change election there's NO WAY they should be counting on LV as a static or near static...
...sample
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beac Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 02:15 PM
Response to Original message
14. What about voters that can see Russia from their houses??? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kdillard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
17. Kick because maybe it will calm people down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tiptoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 06:03 PM
Response to Original message
18. TIA's 9/12 EM averages 15 most recent Registered- & Likely-Voter Polls, and the difference is clear:
Edited on Mon Sep-15-08 06:15 PM by tiptoe

See 9/12 ELECTION MODEL (TIA): OBAMA 293 EV; WHY MSM POLLSTERS "ADJUST" PRE-ELECTION & FINAL EXIT POLL WEIGHTS

The National Model at the top lists the 15 most recent Polls, including both USA/Gallup polls mentioned by Prosense that show the sampling change from RV (pre RNConvention) to LV (post RNConvention) to maximize the McCain "bounce". Poll results changed from Obama 5043% to McCain 54-44%, respectively.

At the bottom of Polls list is a comparison:

Registered V
vs Likely V
Poll Averages

Note these are Pre- and Post-RNConvention polls, with the latter presumably reflective of McCains greatest convention bounce and apparently urged to that effect by a deliberate choice by Gallup and USA Todayto release a poll [LV] that would maximize the impression of McCain's bounce and help shape the campaign narrative in favor of McCain-Palin's favor.

Other includes Undecided Voters
RV includes Newly-Registered voters


TIA adds:
There is also a distinction between Registered Voter (RV) and Likely Voter (LV) Polls. The Democrats always do better in RV polls. The reason: Newly registered voters have been mostly Democratic since 1988. Since then, Democratic presidential candidates have won new voters by an average 14% margin.

The dead heat claimed by pollsters, bloggers and the media is a canard unless they are factoring fraud into their models and not telling us. The media desperately wants a horserace, and so they fail to adjust the polls for undecided and newly registered voters.



For projection purposes (given fraud-free elections held today), TIAs base case scenario assumes a 60%40% split of Undecided Voters favoring Obama (Kerrys base case split was 75%-25%).

TIA provides Sensitivity Analysis, covering five Undecided Voter Allocation (UVA) scenarios (40%, 50%, 60%, 70%, and 80%).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressivebydesign Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 06:09 PM
Response to Original message
19. Gallup has always been a RW org.. as is Insider/Advantage and Hotline.
Polls are like assholes.. everyone has one and they all stink.

Focus on things we can change... like our ground game.

We go thru this every time on DU and I have to say...

IGNORE THE POLLS -- even if they favor our guys. There is no adequate way to gauge voting as it pertains to the electoral votes.

this energy should be focused on getting voters registered, changing minds, AND voting irregularities!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tiptoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-15-08 06:16 PM
Response to Original message
21. K & R !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mcg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-16-08 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
22. Gallup's "Likely Voters" Poll: A Snapshot Or A Hypothesis? (Huffington Post)
From July 29, 2008

Gallup's "Likely Voters" Poll: A Snapshot Or A Hypothesis? (Huffington Post)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/29/gallups-likely...
Over at USA Today's "On Politics" blog, stories about polls come stamped with the following disclaimer: "WARNING! Polls are snapshots of public opinion, not forecasts of far-off election days." It's a noble standard, but sadly, one that is not met by the paper's latest poll, a joint effort with the Gallup firm.
...
As for how "likely voters" were identified, USA Today reports that respondents were asked "how much thought they had given the election, how often they voted in the past and whether they plan to vote this fall." Fair enough. But the very next sentence raises even more questions about whether USA Today's effort is actually a snapshot of the electorate, as its website claims, or enters the realm of forward-looking hypothesizing. Buried in the ninth paragraph of USA Today's own writeup, they reveal that "McCain's gains came because there was an even number of likely voters from each party. Last month, the Democrats had an 11-point edge."

Abramowitz says this contradiction is the equivalent of polling malpractice. "It is simply not plausible that there would be an 11-point swing in party ID among likely voters or that there is now an even split in the likely electorate between Republicans and Democrats," he wrote in an email to the Huffington Post.
...
But grains of salt aside, there is other evidence to suggest that USA Today's "likely voter" poll runs afoul of its own standards in terms of not forecasting far-off election results. In describing the poll's usefulness on MSNBC Tuesday morning, Gallup chief Frank Newport said "it's important to look at likely voters ... just to see under a scenario where McCain supporters are energized." ...


And just why are you so interested in that scenario, Frank Newport?

Gallup would now have us believe that more Republicans than Democrats will vote,
even though there are more registered Democrats than Republicans.

Polls are not snapshots of public opinion, they only measure self-reported answers from the people they happen to poll. Complicating the process by adding in guesswork about "likely voters" just adds to the confusion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Overseas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-16-08 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
23. K&R -- more evidence on the table of bias in some major polls. //eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mcg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-16-08 11:58 AM
Response to Original message
24. Gallup: "Who Are Likely Voters and When Do They Matter?"
Who Are Likely Voters and When Do They Matter?
Frank Newport
July 28, 2008

http://www.gallup.com/poll/109135/Who-Likely-Voters-Whe...
... The July 25-27 USA Today/Gallup poll shows Barack Obama leading John McCain by a 47% to 44% margin among all registered voters but McCain leading Obama among likely voters by a 49% to 45% margin. This difference between registered and likely voters indicates that now McCain voters are disproportionately represented among the estimate of those most likely to vote if the election were held today. This difference (in which Republicans gain among likely voters compared to registered voters) appears for the first time in USA Today/Gallup polls this year. In earlier 2008 polls, more Democrats than Republicans were engaged in the campaign and considered likely voters. This is generally a rare occurrence given that Republicans have historically been more likely to qualify as likely voters under Gallup's model (a fact that has been borne out in the real world as Republicans are able to win elections despite facing deficits in party identification or pre-election standing among all national adults).

The similarity between the likely voter and registered voter numbers in previous polls this year may be because there has been atypical interest in the election and enthusiasm among Democrats -- likely due to the exciting nomination campaign between Obama and Hillary Clinton. ...


My response:
election fraud: voter purging/caging, Republican-controlled voting machines, etc.

Let us overcome the effect of the Republicans' election fraud tactics and prove Frank Newport wrong as to who is likely to vote this November.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Jul 25th 2014, 04:01 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC