Posted on 01/31/2016 12:04:23 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
The final Des Moines Register poll was just released, showing Donald Trump leading the Republican field in Iowa with 28 percent, Ted Cruz with 23 percent and Marco Rubio with 15 percent. Hillary Clinton was ahead of Bernie Sanders, 45 percent to 42 percent, on the Democratic side. The political world - us included - was eagerly awaiting this survey, as Ann Selzer, who has conducted the Register's polls since the 1988 caucuses, has a very good track record. But just how predictive of the final results have Selzer's polls been? History suggests they're a good indicator of what will happen in Monday's Iowa caucuses, though there is room for a candidate or two to surprise.
I've gathered Selzer's final caucus polls for Republicans and Democrats since she started at the Register. For each race, I've calculated the difference between all candidates' polled percentage of support and their final share of the vote.
Selzer's final poll has correctly projected every single winner except for Republican Rick Santorum in 2012.
And the Register poll's successes haven't been limited to blowout races. She caught the late momentum for Democrat John Kerry in 2004 and famously called Barack Obama's victory in 2008.
Even when Selzer's final poll missed the winner in 2012, it still indicated the potential for Santorum to win. The survey was conducted over four days, and in addition to the topline, aggregate numbers, Selzer released day-by-day results. The final day of her last 2012 caucus poll showed Santorum within a percentage point of Mitt Romney. In fact, the average error per candidate of the last day of her final 2012 caucus poll was just 1.9 percentage points.
Indeed, what makes Selzer truly special isn't just that she calls winners but that her error rates are fairly low across all candidates. Her average error per candidate per year has been just 3.3 percentage points. That means that what a candidate receives in her poll is probably going to be pretty close to what he or she gets from voters.
That's not to say the Des Moines Register poll is perfect. It sometimes misses on a candidate by a lot. Selzer's final poll in 1988 missed Republican Pat Robertson's eventual vote share by just more than 10 percentage points. Same thing with Kerry in 2004.
Who might benefit from that type of miss this time around? History suggests there are two types of candidates who tend to outperform their polls. The first is a candidate who does well among Christian conservatives. Selzer's final polls on the Republican side in 1988, 1996 and 2012 all missed the candidate favored by Christian conservatives by at least 8.5 percentage points. That could be good news for Cruz. Secondly, candidates with late momentum, such as Kerry in 2004 and Santorum in 2012, also tend to beat their polls. That could be beneficial to Rubio, who seems to be gaining in some polls.
Could there also be a big error on the Democratic side? It's possible, but Selzer did particularly well in 2000, the last Democratic campaign with only a few candidates running. Fewer candidates means voters have an easier time settling on one candidate and reallocation of support becomes less of an issue.
Of course, we won't know how accurate Selzer's final poll is this year until Monday or the day after. It's worth remembering, however, that even the best pollsters - and Selzer is one of the best - aren't perfect.
We know after the “rally” the other day that Huckabee and Santorum are staying in to help Trump.
Iowans need to maximize their vote and stand with Ted Cruz.
You’ve done nothing to get zotted, Mr. “lesbian” is just showing his anti-constitutional fascist political stripes.
I resemble that remark.
Probably puts a good dent in the outcome of the ongoing FR caucus as well, in addition to online polls not being "scientific".
Good point!
Then again, not a substantive loss for Trump if he's 2nd.
Rubio support is a big factor too.
Well, hopefully the networks abandon the useless undercard debate from now on. Those two guys won’t have the money to last after Iowa.
Someone please zot this jerk for constantly spamming me with his utterly false personal lies.
Who knows what will happen Monday night. But I know this: I am happy I finally have an anti-illeglal immigrant candidate who is winning the polling in almost every state. Trump is in as good shape as he could possibly be given Iowa’s politically religious bent, evangelicals etc. I’d rather be in the shape we’re in as opposed to supporters of Ted.
Trump 2016.
You only post anti Trump stuff. Much of it the same story from multiple sources. You then deride him at every chance you get rather than advocating for a candidate. Your hate for the man that took Walker out is your driving force. In my dictionary that is definition 4 of crap.
Ask away. We do need to have them look through your posting history though. ;-) More than happy to report my supposed abuse, OPERATIVE!!!
I haven’t voted in that poll.
A lot of people don’t take pollster’s calls, I know I don’t.
Also, polls like Drudge: What are they counting? - “votes” from where, Zimbabwe - Russia - France?? - no one knows their political bend, their “party.”
Good. Sometimes it’s good for a person to get a break from the forum, even if it’s a forced break.
LOL... They have put me in time out for some somewhat inappropriate threads. In retrospect... it sucked.
I like you too, but trolling is trolling, even if you dress it up to look like support for another candidate.
And what makes your observation even funnier, is that I was derided this morning for posting an article on national security instead of a political piece.
Comment 11:
"I cannot imagine a worse time to toss that "STUFF" on the forum.
This is just so much noise right now."...
and Comment 23:
"Bogus distraction from domestic tyranny and decline."
I voted for Walker in the last poll to make up for you being so rude to those nice people.
I post threads and almost never go on other threads.
I post threads (back them up with linked material) and try to have a civil exchange.
Here are some numbers:
Total Iowa Registered Republicans as of 1/4/16 = 612,112
- per Iowa Secretary of State website
(The 2012 total Republican caucus vote was 121,255).
These are the possible turnout scenarios for 2016:
If 120,000 turn out, that = 19.6% turnout
If 140,000 turn out, that = 22.8%
If 160,000 turn out, that = 26.1%
It is entirely possible that closer to 160,000 could turn out this year, just a one-third increase over 2012 and little more than a quarter of total registered Republicans.
Add to that the number of party-switchers who will re-register on the spot at the caucuses Monday evening and the results could well be YUGE!
Thx.....
Rubio might surge to 2nd and even if he comes in a strong 3rd...the story afterwards will be a lot about him.
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.