Posted on 11/01/2002 1:14:58 PM PST by for-q-clinton
January 3, 2001
PRESIDENTIAL POLL PERFORMANCE 2000
The accuracy of the election projections based on the pre-election polls of 2000 was surpassed only by the polls of 1976 and 1960, according to a study release today by the National Council on Public Polls. This year's final polls had an average error of 1.1 percentage points on the estimates for George W. Bush and Al Gore. The error on the third place finisher, Ralph Nader, was 1.3 percentage points.
These results were based on the work of 10 polling organizations that used traditional methods for conducting their polls.
| Poll | Bush/Gore Error |
Nader Error |
| Harris Poll | 0.0% | 2.0% |
| CBS News | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| IBD/CSM/Tipp | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| ICR/Politics Now | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| Gallup/CNN/USA Today | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Pew Research | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Zogby/Reuters | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| ABC News/Wash Post | 1.5 | 0.0 |
| NBC News/WSJ | 1.5 | 0.0 |
| Battleground | 2.5 | 1.0 |
| Average | 1.1 | 1.3 |
The 2000 election was a tie between Bush and Gore and was the closest election since the Kennedy-Nixon election in 1960. Democrat Gore had a slight edge in the CBS and Zogby polls, while seven of the other polls leaned to Republican Bush. The Harris poll had it tied. Four years ago, all 9 polls erred in favor of overstating Democratic Clinton. Challenger Nader was overstated by 7 of the 10 polls this year. Two got the Nader vote correct. All other polls overstated Nader's vote. Third party candidates typically get less support in the election than they do in the final pre-election polls.
Two other organizations used methods that previously had not been used. Harris Interactive conducted its polls on the Internet among a panel of e-mail users and forecast a tie. Rasmussen's Portrait of America poll was off by 4.5 percentage points on each of the top two candidates. Rasmussen had its interviews conducted by a computer playing a recorded voice with no live interviewer intervening.
| Alternative Method Polls |
Bush/Gore Error |
Nader Error |
| Harris Interactive | 0.0% | 1.0% |
| Rasmussen | 4.5 |
The ten traditional polls used random samples of telephone households and live interviewers to obtain vote intentions from likely voters. Screening questions that were unique to each poll identified likely voters. More detailed methods statements are available from the individual polling organization.
| 2000-Preliminary | Gore | Bush | Nader | Undecided | Other |
| Election Results | 48% | 48% | 3% | 1% | |
| Zogby | 48% | 46% | 5% | 0% | 1% |
| CBS | 45% | 44% | 4% | 5% | 2% |
| Harris (Phone) | 47% | 47% | 5% | 0% | 1% |
| Gallup/CNN/USA Today | 46% | 48% | 4% | 0% | 2% |
| Pew Research | 47% | 49% | 4% | 0% | 0% |
| IBD/CSM/TIPP | 46% | 48% | 4% | 0% | 2% |
| ICR/Politics Now | 44% | 46% | 7% | 1% | 2% |
| NBC/WSJ | 44% | 47% | 3% | 4% | 2% |
| ABC/WashPost | 45% | 48% | 3% | 3% | 1% |
| Battleground | 45% | 50% | 4% | 0% | 1% |
| Alternative Methods | |||||
| Harris Interactive | 47% | 47% | 4% | 0% | 2% |
| Rasmussen | 49% | 40% | 4% |
For this election, 2 of the 10 polls overstated Gore's vote while 7 overstated Bush. In the 1996 election, 8 out of 9 polls overstated Democrat Clinton. One poll each year neither under- or over- stated the winners' percentage.
Presidential Poll Performance 2000 Error Calculator
Final National Presidential Poll Results, 1936-2000
For more information about this and other polling issues, contact NCPP Polling Review members:
|
Harry O'Neill (Chairman) |
Warren Mitosfky
Mitofsky International 212-980-3031 (office) |
|
For more information, please contact us at: info@ncpp.org
Bottomeline: Zogby was NOT the most accurate. In fact there were several others that were more accurate. Also Zogby completely screwed up the NY Senate race.
You mean he's Jewish? Just kidding. I'm just pointing out that I never understood why the Jews vote RAT. The RATs have the most anti-semetic people at the core of their party--blacks and Arabs.
He admitted he guessed the black turnout and rat fixes better then most !
The internal party polls are right on the money.
ON election day 2000 Al Gore broke a long tradition of not campaigning on election day. Al Gore got on his plane in Illinois and went to a state to campaign on Election day itself.
What state was that?
The answer is Florida.
What little bird told Gore that on the final day in the final hour he should go to Florida to campaign? You don't suppose his internal polls showed that state would decide the race do you? You don't suppose the polls told him that if he could pick up a few of thousand votes, it might be enough to win... do you? He almost got it done.
And When they all called Florida for Gore .. how did Bush know it was not true? He called to tell them it was not true. How did he know? You dont' suppose that Bush's internal polls told him he had a tiny slim lead do you?
The fact is the media polls told us in 1980 the race was way to close to call. But the night before election Hamilton Jourdan told Jimmy Carter there was no way he could win. The polls had for weeks shown a big Reagan win and the final poll showed his campaiging had made no change. Just a couple of hours earlier Lyn Nafziger and others had sat down with Reagan on his plane to tell him that nothing had changed.. He had a big lead and was on his way to a huge landslide. The media told us the polls said too close to call. Jimmy Carter tells about learning of his loss in his autobiography. Several people have written about giving Reagan the good news. I think the media did not want to hear it.
The same was true in 84, 88, 92, and 96. The internal polls told both sides what was really happening.
I believe both sides know exactly what is going to take place. Back in 1994 I was in the media. I talked to a Democrat chaiman of an important House committee a day before the election. He told me "The damned Republicans are going to win the house." I was surprised. All the wire and network stories said the Democrats would hold the house by 15 to 20 seats. I asked, "By 2 or 3 seats?" He said, "More like 16 to 20." It was very like 20.
I suspect the Repubicans knew it too. I know the Democrats did.
I really think from all the signs that this is going to be close election. The Repubicans will do well in the House and the Senate will be won by one or 2 seats.
Anyone else remember what other races he said we'd win/lose?
I think that, under this analysis, the same would be true in California where the presstitutes will trumpet a Fields poll showing a Grayout 7 point lead, but nothing from Grayout or Simon's internal tracking numbers. It is for that reason that I think that Simon's hanging in there and Grayout is not the given that the press would make one think.
Another point you make that is very valid, IMHO, is the impression we as outsiders get from what is going on. The Rats are turning to the courts at every opportunity and becoming shriller in their attacks. This is a good sign. I agree that the GOP is the happier of the two parties and only hope that they realize the war is on and not to stop until the last vote is cast. I don't think they will. One or two seats for the GOP in the Senate is definitely a realistic assessment, to this untrained eye.
Thanks again for the comments and have a great weekend....
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.