Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What John McLaughlin [Pollster] Sees in the Polls Right Now
nro ^ | September 21, 2012 8:27 A.M | Jim Geraghty

Posted on 09/22/2012 8:30:07 PM PDT by Red Steel

I reached out to Republican pollster John McLaughlin for yesterday’s piece on how undecided voters are likely to break, and he made some separate comments about polls, their impact on motivation for each side, and how the campaigns want to use skewed poll numbers to depress the opposition.

How he’s defining likely voters right now: “For the most part we’re polling likely voters. It’s a loose screen. We keep people who say they’re only somewhat likely to vote. But the vast majority say that they are definitely or very likely to vote. They’re voting.”

How campaigns try to sway polling results: “In a close race, the operatives are trying to manipulate the turnout through their paid and earned media. The earned media includes lobbying and trying to skew the public polls. Historically the most egregious case was the 2000 Gore campaign’s lobbying the networks’ exit pollsters for an early, and wrong, call in Florida. This suppressed the Florida Panhandle and Western state turnout.” (Polls close at different times in different parts of the state, because the state stretches into two time zones.) “In our post-election Florida poll, we found that thousands of Panhandle Floridians heard the call and although their polls were still open for an hour in a close national race decided not to vote. Panhandle voters went two-to-one for Bush. The CBS early wrong call nearly triggered a national crisis.”

On what a realistic partisan breakdown would look like: “The 2004 national exit polls showed an even partisan turnout and Bush won 51–48. Had it been the +4 Democratic edge of 2000, John Kerry would have been president. 2008 was a Democratic wave that gave them a +7 partisan advantage. 2010 was a Republican edge. There’s no wave right now. There are about a dozen swing states where in total millions of voters who voted in 2008 for Obama are gone or have not voted since. There are also hundreds of thousands of voters in each of several swing states like Ohio, Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado, and others who voted from rural, exurban or suburban areas in 2004 for Bush who did not vote in 2008, because they were not excited by McCain or thought he would lose. They are currently planning to vote mainly as a vote against President Obama.”

What Obama and his allies are doing now: “The Democrats want to convince [these anti-Obama voters] falsely that Romney will lose to discourage them from voting. So they lobby the pollsters to weight their surveys to emulate the 2008 Democrat-heavy models. They are lobbying them now to affect early voting. IVR [Interactive Voice Response] polls are heavily weighted. You can weight to whatever result you want. Some polls have included sizable segments of voters who say they are ‘not enthusiastic’ to vote or non-voters to dilute Republicans. Major pollsters have samples with Republican affiliation in the 20 to 30 percent range, at such low levels not seen since the 1960s in states like Virginia, Florida, North Carolina and which then place Obama ahead. The intended effect is to suppress Republican turnout through media polling bias. We’ll see a lot more of this. Then there’s the debate between calling off a random-digit dial of phone exchanges vs. a known sample of actual registered voters. Most polls favoring Obama are random and not off the actual voter list. That’s too expensive” for some pollsters.


TOPICS: Extended News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012polls; demlies; mediabias; pollbias

1 posted on 09/22/2012 8:30:12 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
thanks for posting this .
I read his clips on hotair.

we live in a dangerous world with Axelrod and his loyal media storm troopers acting like Gobbles and his henchman.
Tell the lie over and over.

2 posted on 09/22/2012 8:36:23 PM PDT by ncalburt (QUIETLY CHANG)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

I’m tired of the corporateeze phrase “reach out [to]...”

Where did that come from? “If you have any questions, please reach out to me...” “We reached out to him for comment...”

Maybe it came from the old Ma Bell “reach out and touch someone” ad campaign.


3 posted on 09/22/2012 8:36:34 PM PDT by WXRGina (Further up and further in!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

“The Democrats want to convince [these anti-Obama voters] falsely that Romney will lose to discourage them from voting”

I also see this happening in the blogsphere on random websites, once conservative comments are now being drowned out by libs. I can imagine an army of geeks sitting in a sweaty room banging on the keyboards - “liking” each others posts.

(yes I’m aware of how that sounds)


4 posted on 09/22/2012 8:38:12 PM PDT by mike_9958
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WXRGina

I’m tired of the corporateeze phrase “reach out [to].”

Thank you. Final straw was the service company “reaching out to tell me that my tire was repaired”. Modern lingo is just stupid IMO. Quit with the change.


5 posted on 09/22/2012 8:46:41 PM PDT by Grams A (The Sun will rise in the East in the morning and God is still on his throne.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ncalburt
From the article.

John McLaughlin - " You can weight to whatever result you want. Some polls have included sizable segments of voters who say they are ‘not enthusiastic’ to vote or non-voters to dilute Republicans. Major pollsters have samples with Republican affiliation in the 20 to 30 percent range, at such low levels not seen since the 1960s in states like Virginia, Florida, North Carolina and which then place Obama ahead. "

McLaughlin is seeing what we are seeing. It's too bad some of us easily get confused and feel defeated by the Dem bull.

6 posted on 09/22/2012 8:47:55 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

Thanks Red Steel.


7 posted on 09/22/2012 8:48:24 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: WXRGina

http://www.oldielyrics.com/lyrics/the_four_tops/reach_out_ill_be_there.html


8 posted on 09/22/2012 8:48:24 PM PDT by Red Badger (Anyone who thinks wisdom comes with age is either too young or too stupid to know the difference....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: All

This is the heart of the matter....money shots....

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/327856/measuring-undecideds-jim-geraghty

MEASURING THE UNDECIDEDS

(snip)

Democratic pollster Peter Hart and Republican pollster Bill McInturff conducted the NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey and isolated the respondents whom they classified as “up for grabs” — either undecided or leaning only slightly to one of the candidates. Several demographic indicators suggest that the remaining voters are ripe for the picking for Romney: 68 percent are white, 57 percent are married, 53 percent are men, 70 percent think the country is headed in the wrong direction, and 60 percent disapprove of how Obama is doing his job.

(snip)

What tends to happen is the vote decision is driven by two things,” McInturff said. “Your feeling about the direction of the country — where 70 percent say the country is on the wrong track — and their feelings about the president’s performance, which is very negative. I don’t think Romney will get 100 percent of this vote, but I do think a chunk will vote and they will disproportionately break to Romney.”

(snip)
Just about any Republican presidential candidate would be thrilled to face an election where victory comes down to persuading white married voters who think the country is on the wrong track and the Democratic incumbent is disappointing to vote for him.


9 posted on 09/22/2012 8:49:57 PM PDT by Kolath
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Bump


10 posted on 09/22/2012 8:50:43 PM PDT by Jet Jaguar (The pundits have forgotten the 2010 elections.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

bump


11 posted on 09/22/2012 8:51:24 PM PDT by smokingfrog ( sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

You’re welcome SC. :-)


12 posted on 09/22/2012 8:54:30 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
Four years of Axelrod threatening and eliminating media people who would threaten his 2012 reelection psych ops strategy and look what we get.

I wonder how many difficult /honest media were destroyed by Axelrod and Team Obama to get total obedience you see now. I give credit to Fox for firing Major Garret after he was seen attending Axelrod birthdays and private parties.
But evil Axelrod found him a spot to spread their lies at the left wing National Journal, a subsidiary of the WH PR machine.

13 posted on 09/22/2012 9:05:58 PM PDT by ncalburt (QUIETLY CHANG)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ncalburt

I have had my suspicions about Garrett. Is Laura Ingraham still giving him a forum?


14 posted on 09/22/2012 9:10:41 PM PDT by TheLawyerFormerlyKnownAsAl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

I ignore any poll and it doesn’t matter who from, left, center or right each has its own agenda and 2012 should be the last year polls are used, they should be banned outright.


15 posted on 09/22/2012 9:11:23 PM PDT by Eye of Unk (OPSEC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grams A

“Modern lingo is just stupid IMO. “

Agreed!!! Every service involving a computer is a “solution”, and any rapid rate of change is “skyrocketing”. UGH!!!


16 posted on 09/22/2012 9:18:43 PM PDT by Frank_2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TheLawyerFormerlyKnownAsAl
I have not found her radio anywhere now so have no idea.
Thankfully obama troll Major got the big hook.
17 posted on 09/22/2012 9:21:02 PM PDT by ncalburt (QUIETLY CHANG)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

I like to listen to “A Lotus On Irish Streams” at work.


18 posted on 09/22/2012 9:24:18 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ncalburt

Is that what happened to Major Garret? I thought he quit Fox.


19 posted on 09/22/2012 9:33:43 PM PDT by CaptainK (...please make it stop. Shake a can of pennies at it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

In 1992 when there was only CNN and the alphabet networks, Ross Perot was at 31% and Clinton and Bush were in the high 20s. Overnight it flipped and Perot slipped down to something like 26%. Perot’s campaign manager called CNN and they told him they stopped counting people who did not vote in the last election whether they were voting in 1992 or not. Bottom line is a big chunk of Perot’s support was from people who didn’t intend to vote until he got in. Now CNN wasn’t counting them.

This is not an argument for or against Perot. What I’m pointing out is this was happening in 1992. The media folks who do the polls are make them come out the way they want them to. And sadly, probably 20% of the voters want to pick a winner so they go with the polls.


20 posted on 09/22/2012 9:49:27 PM PDT by Terry Mross (The Clintons seem to be very afraid of obama. Do they owe him their souls?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Terry Mross

As I recall, that’s about the time ears suspended his campaign for a month. Perot did not any part in winning.


21 posted on 09/22/2012 9:57:10 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Terry Mross

I am not sure if my link below is posted correctly, but it is a YouTube of the CBS pundit table in 1980 after Reagan was declared the winner.

It is a great watch as all the LIbs are astonished how the actual vote broke so soundly towards Reagan after the polls showed it a tight race.

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OohreUeVoHw&feature=youtube_gdata_player [\url]

Worth five minutes of your time.


22 posted on 09/22/2012 10:05:05 PM PDT by SteveAustin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Perot did not [want] any part in winning.


23 posted on 09/22/2012 10:06:32 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SteveAustin

The link works fine. As you said, well worth the five minutes. And Dan Rather acknowledging the electorates rejection of liberalism, Priceless!

Thanks for posting that link. :)


24 posted on 09/22/2012 10:55:50 PM PDT by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Keep in mind even the Exit Polls of actual voters on election day have been wrong, and had Kerry beating Bush.


25 posted on 09/22/2012 11:27:03 PM PDT by Andrei Bulba (No Obama, no way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WXRGina
It was used by all the Clintonistas during the Vince Foster “suicide” investigation as an excuse for all the fishy phone calls between white house staff on the night he died. They were “reaching out” to each other.
26 posted on 09/23/2012 4:44:31 AM PDT by Barb4Bush (God bless Glenn Beck!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ncalburt

Same here, Laura has not been on the radio here (Mpls) since shortly after he left FOX.


27 posted on 09/23/2012 5:35:22 AM PDT by TheLawyerFormerlyKnownAsAl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Ah, yes! A classic! But, they didn’t have to insert it into the corporate lexicon. :-)


28 posted on 09/23/2012 6:52:31 AM PDT by WXRGina (Further up and further in!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Grams A
Thank you. Final straw was the service company “reaching out to tell me that my tire was repaired”. Modern lingo is just stupid IMO. Quit with the change.

Amen!

29 posted on 09/23/2012 6:55:22 AM PDT by WXRGina (Further up and further in!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: WXRGina
I’m tired of the corporateeze phrase “reach out [to]...” Where did that come from?

Sounds like Mob talk or maybe lawyer's? I reached out to him and made an offer he couldn't refuse...

Regards,
GtG

30 posted on 09/23/2012 3:52:45 PM PDT by Gandalf_The_Gray (I live in my own little world, I like it 'cuz they know me here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Gandalf_The_Gray

HA! Yeah, well whatever it is, it’s everywhere today! If you deal with corporations, you can’t escape it. :-/


31 posted on 09/23/2012 4:21:47 PM PDT by WXRGina (Further up and further in!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson