What happened in Colorado with Allard? (Vanity)

[Lunatic Fringe]

Polls are always wrong- never trust them. The polls were wrong in order to energize voters. Unless the polls show a 20 point lead for a candidate, I always assume it's a dead heat.

[Tennessean4Bush]

bttt mice elf

[Tennessean4Bush]

Thanks, but I am looking for a little better explanation than that.

[AdamSelene235]

Same thing that happened across the entire nation, it became clear the Dems have no answers for America.

About half the Libertarian vote defected since the Senate was at stake but this was not key.

Additionally the leftists are disgusted and voted Green, and the Republicans probably came out in greater numbers to seize the prize.

Thats my impression.

[Asclepius]

Anyone have a link to a good analysis of why all the polls seemed to be so badly wrong?

I heard a Democrat pollster on PBS saying the same thing: the polls in the South were horribly off--Republicans won, and they won in the double digits, when the best polls taken only hours before suggested that in the best possible scenarios they were all in a dead heat or even slightly behind.

Apparently Republicans in the South do not talk to pollsters.

[NorCoGOP]

All of Allard's internal polls had him winning by the actual vote margin...they were dead on.

Strickland blew it by only really campaigning hard in Denver and Boulder counties (liberal strongholds).

Allard CREAMED Strickland in El Paso and Weld counties by OVERWHELMING numbers (Weld is his home county, El Paso has 10+ military bases). Allard won I believe ALL BUT FOUR or FIVE counties, and those he lost were not by the overwhelming margin that Zogby et al predicted....the liberal media compounded this by going national with the giddy news Strickland would win by 9+....then there was a 15 point shift TO Allard in the final vote....

I love this state!

[Tennessean4Bush]

Any explanations on why it seemed like every pollster and pundit missed Colorado so badly? Did it really break so strongly on election eve? Was there a poll that showed an 8 pt lead for Allard (Wasn't that the final tally)?

[dirtboy]

This snippet was in the Rocky Mountain News:

Gov. Bill Owens said Allard's win could be attributed in part to the GOP's aggressive final 96-hour vote turnout effort.

"I think the program of putting 2,100 people on the streets really worked," said Owens.

I've seen this tactic mentioned in several states. Looks like the GOP saw how they were deficient in GOTV activities in 2000 and more than corrected for it.

[gov_bean_ counter]

People lie to pollsters.

[Tennessean4Bush]

Thanks, this is the beginning of a real explanation. I guess this explains why the Allard camp kept telling the national GOP that they were confident while alot of the Washington based GOP and pundits were scared to death.

[Tennessean4Bush]

I think you get 1-2 pts with GOTV, tops. But, this thing was 20pts different than many polls.

I wonder if the military vote was not considered heavily enough.

[Dems_R_Losers]

President Bush made a big difference in this race, IMO. he campaigned hard for Allard. Allard started out behind in fundraising but caught up. He appeared to be running a not sufficiently aggressive campaign for a while and so it became fashionable to pick him to lose. Republicans had a good turnout operation and the Christian conservative vote in and around Colorado Springs was huge for Allard. I think the GOP turnout was simply much greater than expected in this race.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Polls are out-of-focus snapshots taken at the wrong time. I did hear a few people say things like "I don't like the Republicans, but I don't like the Estate Tax either." Some of these people will jump at the last minute. It's very hard to get a representative sample. Look at the misses by "Portrait of America" in the last election (which may replace the 1936 or 1948 elections as the pollster-boy warning.)

I don't think anyone predicted such a big blowout by Richardson.

[Tennessean4Bush]

That explains some of it, but I mean the local papers had this neck-and-neck and Zogby (idiot) must have transposed his numbers through some spreadsheet snafu.

[LS]

Among other things, it appears that he good a large boost from the Hispanic vote, according to the Wash. Times.

[Owl4USA]

I think you are pretty close to the truth. I know I am a Libertarian that was so fed up with the dems, and knew how close this thing was that I went out and voted (almost) straight Republican this election. I know alot of fellow Libertarians that did the same.

[Tennessean4Bush]

Who was the consultant doing his polling? Whomever it was will have no trouble getting work in Colorado for years to come. Zogpiss should have trouble getting work now, but probably won't.

[KellyAdmirer]

Several things:

1. The outcome was exactly the same as in 1996, same guys, same issues, same result;

2. GoTV effort got out the vote

3. Allard's ads were better and more noticeable

4. There was a lot of telephone-bank calling of recorded messages. The Democrats had Strickland calling, the Republicans Barbara Bush. Babs' calls were more impressive to the folks I know

5. Colorado has been getting a ton of new voters fleeing the liberal coasts. Colorado is more, not less, conservative than it used to be, even five years ago.

6. Strickland barely seemed to show his face south of Denver, don't recall seeing him at all in Colorado Springs, which is loaded with military and Focus on the Family.

7. The polls in 2000 at times showed a tossup in Colorado, which also were way off. For whatever reason, the polls do not detect a deep, underlying Republican sympathy here and overestimate the Democrat turnout. Republicans pretty much swept the state this year, as usual. It is very rough for the Democrats here. Some communities, like Leadville, even elect Libertarians.

[dirtboy]

That explains some of it, but I mean the local papers had this neck-and-neck and Zogby (idiot) must have transposed his numbers through some spreadsheet snafu.

We've been seeing anecdotal evidence about the increasing difficulty of polling, with call waiting, caller ID and cell phones steadily reducing the pool of voters willing to be surveyed. And this reduction is, in all likelihood, not neutral - it would tend IMO to remove more pubbies from the pool than dems. However, it is interesting that Allard's internal polls were spot-on, so I think the most likely source is deliberate bias on the part of pollsters to try and influence a shift in public opinion. However, IMO in this election the combination of a massive grass-roots effort and Bush's efforts more than countered any such manipulation. Toss in the palpable disgust around the country at the Dem tactics in both NJ and Minnesota, and you have both a powerful push and pull.