Posted on 10/21/2008 2:02:50 AM PDT by My Favorite Headache
Media outlets are preparing for the possibility that their Election Day surveys could be skewed because of overstated support for Barack Obama, largely because of the enthusiasm of his supporters.
While exit polling is a notoriously inexact science—early exit poll results suggested John Kerry would be elected president in 2004—the introduction of several new variables, ranging from the zeal of Obama’s supporters to his racial background to widespread early voting, is causing concerns among those who charged with conducting the surveys and the networks that will be reporting them.
“It’s in some ways the flip side of non-cooperation,” said one pollster involved in preparations, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, “It’s over-cooperation by certain people.”
Unlike a traditional poll that asks voters who they intend to support, exit polls are taken outside the polling place immediately after voters have cast their ballots. The interviewing begins when the polls open in the morning and lasts throughout the day until shortly before the polls close.
The exit polls are conducted by the National Election Pool (NEP), a consortium of ABC News, Associated Press, CBS News, CNN, Fox News and NBC News formed in 2003.
In theory, exit polls should match election results. But for all the care that goes into conducting accurate exit polls, errant results aren’t completely uncommon. Respected polling analyst Mark Blumenthal found that during the Democratic primaries this year, preliminary exit polls overestimated Obama's strength in 18 of 20 states, by an average error of 7 percentage points, based on leaked early results.
The reason? Obama’s supporters were younger, better educated and often more enthusiastic than Hillary Clinton's, meaning they were more likely to participate in exit polls.
Insurgent candidate Pat Buchanan’s support also was overstated in the 1992 New Hampshire Republican primary, a phenomenon attributed to the greater willingness of his impassioned supporters to participate in exit surveys.
More recently, in 2004, exit poll data that began circulating early in the afternoon led to short-lived Democratic elation and deep Republican anxiety. By evening, some of President George W. Bush’s key strategists were frantic, emailing reporters at polling organizations to better understand the gap between what they were finding on their own and what the leaked exit polls indicated.
As it turned out, preliminary exit polls overstated women’s turnout that year. This “programming error,” which affects the statistical method that pollsters use to match surveys to the electorate’s composition, was discovered by the third wave of exit polling.
By then, though, the premature polls had already been leaked online.
While the exit poll questionnaire—what’s asked and how—is not yet decided upon this year, as part of their Election Day preparations many news organizations are conducting rehearsals next week to prepare for possible hiccups.
“We know there are concerns about exit polls,” said Kathy Frankovic, who directs CBS News polling unit. “Our goal is to do two things on election night: explain what’s going on and why, and to accurately project outcomes.”
One important difference between 2008 and 2004 is that the early poll results are less likely to leak. Just as in 2006, the NEP has isolated a room in New York City where analysts are closed off to communication.
Accurate sampling, however, is an even greater concern. In 2004, the over-sampling of women—who are more likely to be Democrats—was not the only error. Democrats, in general, turned out to be more likely to participate in the exit poll interviews than Republicans.
It also surfaced that younger interviewers, who hand out the paper questionnaire to voters, were less likely to get a response from older voters. Older voters are more likely Republican.
In the end, Kerry’s vote was overstated in 26 states. The same was true for Bush in four states, according to a detailed post election analysis by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International, who administer the exit poll for the NEP.
To correct their methodology, Joe Lenski, executive vice-president of Edison, said the NEP has increased the average age of those conducting interviews. In 2004, that age was 34 years old. Today, the average is 42.
In addition, the NEP has successfully won the right in several state courts to allow their interviewers to gain closer physical access to polling places. This allows pollsters to measure a more accurate sample. There has also been increased training of interviewers to maintain random sampling—for example, cautioning interviewers to not habitually approach the next approaching voter if one voter declines.
“The lessons of ’04 that have been applied to exit polls since then are that interviewers need to have better training, that you need to be cautious in looking at the results,” Frankovic said. “And the world is going to be grabbing at the information as soon as it’s out there and you can’t control what the world says about it.”
But the NEP will control when the world has access to the data. Each news organization sponsoring the massive 50-state survey will have three representatives in the closed-door analysis room. Not until 5 p.m., when at least two waves of polling are completed in most states, will the media sponsors have wider access to digest the data.
And, unlike with a standard phone poll, the staff handing out the forms can track the race, gender, and estimated age of those who decline to participate. That could matter since pollsters have noted that older or less educated voters are often less likely to participate and those voters are more likely to have latent racial sentiments.
In general these errors, when tracked in real time, can be corrected for by pollsters before the results are reported.
Pollsters interviewed were confident that latent racism would not skew poll findings, such as if a white respondent votes for McCain but writes Obama on the questionnaire.
“I don’t think there is a reason to expect there will be an effect of racism, mostly because of the secret ballot,” said the pollster involved in preparations.
If anything, the impact of a massive increase in early voting is actually more of a concern than latent racism. The pollster involved termed it “the issue that is obviously on the minds on of exit pollsters.”
The NEP will be increasingly relying on phone polls conducted prior to Election Day to compensate for states with large portions of early voters--a technique that proved successful most recently in the Democratic primaries.
These exit polls are clearly scientifically invalid, and trying such artificial modifications as changing the age of the interviewer is akin to changing from chickens to ducks when you read the entrails.
Polling during the campaign season, even given its scientific invalidity, can at least used by campaigns to do such things as allocating campaign resources since they don't have any other tools except experience (a speedometer that's off by 5 miles per hour is still more useful than no speedometer at all), and experience generally does not catch new trends.
But an exit poll isn't even useful for that; the campaigns have no need for such polling data.
Or Obama is so far ahead he can coast, doesn’t need some of those states and will try to consolidate power in house and senate seats in weaker areas by having stronger coat tails where the house and senate elections are close.
Why don’t we just wait until we COUNT THE VOTES.
These polls should be illegal.
What else do the talking heads have to talk about then and how else can they continue to cheer on their favorites?
Not even close. You’re getting multiple sources saying that Dems need to “not go wobbly” (Shrum today), warning of riots if he doesn’t win (won’t tell you the source). This is all in line with my prediction that the national polls would have to get within 2 by November 4 so they could claim some accuracy, and the “Bradley Effect” would give McCain an Electoral College win. Well, all the polls are tightening, down from 9 to 2 in Gallup, 4 in the other Gallup. Hmmm.
I think they are very worried. So far it has been fun for them to report Obama 24/7. Now its crunch time. They know they have overstated and overpolled Obama. They also know that the voters are going to have their say, now, and they are scared to death that they are going to be exposed for the frauds they are. This time they haven’t held anything back. They have supported Obama with enthusiam not caring about their supposed neutrality. They know they have openly cast their lot with Obama and ao far they haven’t cared who knew it because they were so sure of an Obama win. Now they are beginning to get nervous. They know if McCain wins, they can’t go back to pretending to be unbiased. They have went too far in their zeal for Obama. They are very scared.
My wife was just mentioning that this is the election of McCain/Palin versus the Media.
There is NO valid use of an exit poll other than to supress turnout in the more western states. Or, like in 2000, the western handle of Florida.
I understand your points. I’m just saying we don’t have enough information to determine what is really happening behind the scenes in Obama camp and what inclination they may give might be misleading on purpose.
The major objective fact I cannot reconcile with low poll numbers for McCain is the turnout for GOP rallies and the TV ratings when either Palin or McCain are on.
This groundswell is not apparent in the polls and it confuses me.
I have a sneaking suspicion that the media is setting us up the bomb.
0bama loses? Well, obviously because of fraud. Look at the polls. Time to RIOT!!!
They need polling data for cheating purposes in the courts later. Never mind that polling exit data should be illegal, if a person doesn’t say the correct person will they be targeted? Will their “yes” vote to prevent being targeted by a thug be used more than their McCain vote in the booth?
“They’ve” stacked every thing nice and neat, hoping to wrap it up in November. Prayer now, and afterward...well, forever, is the only thing that will prevent America’s downfall. No, I’m not being dramatic.
Unsubstantiated rumors that Obama may also be pulling out of WI.
Source, please?
Cheers!
have you seen the FNC video of the acorn rally?
red t-shirts, ill fitting red baseball caps, yelling we need obama and obama needs us.
it was 1938 again.
you could not see more insanity except in a south american socialist rally.
they are all set to riot. they have their pair riots ready to go.
Shouldn't they be wearing Prius Blue t-shirts? Red is now *our* color.
Don’t respond.
The RNC should put out a press release asking all who vote republican not to participate.
This, they can say, is the only way we’ll end the practice of using early voting patterns to bias/prevent voting later in the day and evening, especially across the country.
Republican voters. Don’t cooperate.
It will be automatically apparent, then, that any numbers released will be wrong.
Don’t cooperate in any polls prior to the election. Don’t cooperate in exit polls.
Sorry. For now, you have to make do with rumors. I’ll let you know when we have confirmation.
“being promised what is going to happen when barry takes office.”
democrats and power=punks and lunch money.
IMHO
That's a great idea!
With regard to the polls:
I’ve been paying attention to Presidential elections and their coverage in the MSM since Reagan’s first term, and I don’t remember a single one in which media-sponsored polls didn’t show the Democrat, whoever it was, solidly ahead in the months before election day. Every single time.I wrote that back in June. Here's proof.They will show the Democrat with a comfortable lead until sometime in October. Then the race will be said to be tightening, and “journalists” with long faces will express surprise, and then suspicion. The GOP will be said to be “buying” the election. Campaign financing will become an issue.
Finally, just before the election, the polls will be “too close to call.” A few will show the GOP candidate ahead by three or four percentage points; this lead, which was called “comfortable” or “commanding” when it was enjoyed by the Democrat candidate, will now be called “a statistical tie” or “inside the margin of error” when it favors the Republican.
If the GOP wins, exit polling data that favored the Democrat will be used to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the entire election. Investigations will be called for. Lawsuits will be encouraged.
That is a precise description of any number of elections. The exception is the Perot influenced election.
I agree...silence is golden in cases like these.
Well, ask yourself if his appearance schedule matches up with the districts that have tight. As far as I can tell, they don’t. Take Wisconsin: No Senators up for re-election, and I think there might be one Rep race that’s not a safe seat. Yet Obama and his surrogates are showing up there big time.
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.