The New Editor - Polls

Interesting polling tidbit of the day

tpelia@yahoo.com (Tom Elia) — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 14:04:00 -0600

Today, the Gallup poll's three-day moving average from Oct. 12-14 measures President Obama's approval rating at 48%.

As the Weekly Standard's Jay Cost pointed out in a recent piece, Gallup changed the methodology of its poll at the beginning of October 2012 in such a way that boosts the president's approval rating by about 3% compared with its previous methodology.

By way of comparison, Gallup's measurement of Obama's approval rating from Oct. 12-14 in 2010 showed an approval rating of 44%.

These Gallup findings from 2010 and 2012 indicate that the president's approval ratings for the two periods are roughly equivalent -- yet a majority of polls are using the 2008 election for their respective turnout models, as if the results from 2010 never happened.

This doesn't seem to comport with reality.

Notice that Obama's 2008 victory margin over John McCain -- 7.26% -- trailed the Dems' victory margin in the aggregate US House vote by about 3.25% and that the Repubs won the 2010 aggregate US House vote by about 6.6%.

Here are the actual election results for both the presidential and aggregate US House votes from 2000-2010, along with the exit polling data for the same period:

National
Presidential Popular-Vote Results: (US)
2008
Obama 52.9%
McCain 45.6%
Other 1.5%

2004
Bush 50.7%
Kerry 48.3%
Other 1.0%

2000
Gore 48.4%
Bush 47.9%
Other 3.7%

Aggregate US House Vote: (US)
2010
Reps 51.4%
Dems 44.8%
Other 3.8%

2008
Dems 52.9%
Reps 42.4%
Other 4.7%

2006
Dems 52.0%
Reps 44.1%
Other 3.9%

2004
Reps 49.2%
Dems 46.6%
Other 4.2%

2002
Reps 49.6%
Dems 45.0%
Other 5.4%

2000
Reps 47.3%
Dems 47.0%
Other 5.7%

Exit Polling Data: (US)
2010 (US House)
Reps 35%
Dems 35%
Ind 29%

2008 (Pres.)
Dems 39%
Reps 32%
Ind 29%

2006 (US House)
Dems 38%
Reps 36%
Ind 26%

2004 (Pres.)
Reps 37%
Dems 37%
Ind 26%

2002 (Not available)
Dems
Reps
Ind

2000 (Pres.)
Dems 39%
Reps 35%
Ind 26%

Pew: Response Rates to Polls Just 25% of that in 1997

tpelia@yahoo.com (Tom Elia) — Mon, 21 May 2012 00:02:00 -0600

From Pew Research: (emphasis added)

It has become increasingly difficult to contact potential respondents and to persuade them to participate. The percentage of households in a sample that are successfully interviewed -- the response rate -- has fallen dramatically. At Pew Research, the response rate of a typical telephone survey was 36% in 1997 and is just 9% today.

The general decline in response rates is evident across nearly all types of surveys, in the United States and abroad. At the same time, greater effort and expense are required to achieve even the diminished response rates of today. These challenges have led many to question whether surveys are still providing accurate and unbiased information. Although response rates have decreased in landline surveys, the inclusion of cell phones -- necessitated by the rapid rise of households with cell phones but no landline -- has further contributed to the overall decline in response rates for telephone surveys.

A new study by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press finds that, despite declining response rates, telephone surveys that include landlines and cell phones and are weighted to match the demographic composition of the population continue to provide accurate data on most political, social and economic measures. This comports with the consistent record of accuracy achieved by major polls when it comes to estimating election outcomes, among other things.

Of course, the demographic composition is the key...

Very Interesting Tidbits from NYT/CBS Poll

tpelia@yahoo.com (Tom Elia) — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 12:02:00 -0700

I thought these results from two questions in the most recent New York Times/CBS News poll were absolutely fascinating:

85. How would you mainly describe the policies Barack Obama has pursued as president -- as socialist, liberal, moderate, conservative or libertarian?

Socialist 26%
Liberal 22%
Moderate 28%
Conservative 6%
Libertarian 4%
DK/NA 15%

86. Do you have a positive or negative view of socialism?

Positive 33%
Negative 49%
DK/NA 18%

Exit Polling Data by Income Group (2000-2010)

tpelia@yahoo.com (Tom Elia) — Thu, 15 Dec 2011 12:14:00 -0700

A common refrain used in American political rhetoric today is that 'the middle class is disappearing in the US and that the rich are taking a larger share of the economic pie at the expense of the lower and middle classes.'

This line of argument has been repeated so often, it now part of the Conventional Wisdom, and therefore, say those repeating it, a problem the government needs to address.

However, these accepted facts seems to be contradicted by national exit-polling data collected in the election cycles from 2000-2010 (there was no exit-poll data for 2002; also, the data does not total to 100% in every year due to rounding):

Percentage of Vote by Income (Less than $50k)

2000 47%
2002 ND
2004 45%
2006 40%
2008 37%
2010 36%

Percentage of Vote by Income ($50-100k)

2000 38%
2002 ND
2004 37%
2006 38%
2008 36%
2010 36%

Percentage of Vote by Income (More than $100k)

2000 15%
2002 ND
2004 18%
2006 23%
2008 26%
2010 27%

While the exit-poll data on household income has not been adjusted for inflation for the period from 2000-2010, note that it shows the percentage of voters coming from households making less than $50k per year has decreased by more than 20% over that time span, that the group making between $50k-$100k has shrunk by about 5%, and that the group making more than $100k has grown by 80% from 2000-2010.

So on a percentage-point basis, almost all of the shrinkage in the 'less-than $50k' income group of voters during the past decade has been mirrored by the growth in the 'over $100k' income group, with the $50k-$100k income group of voters remaining roughly stable to slightly smaller.

That certainly doesn't appear to fit the narrative very neatly, at least when using the voting public as the sample group.

USA Today poll puts President Obama's approval at 41%

tpelia@yahoo.com (Tom Elia) — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 11:34:00 -0600

'Worse than expected.'

Hurricane GOP On The Way?

tpelia@yahoo.com (Tom Elia) — Fri, 02 Jul 2010 13:55:00 -0600

Charlie Cook:

Among all voters, there has been a significant swing since 2008 when Democrats took their new majority won in 2006 to an even higher level. But when you home in on those people in this survey who are most likely to vote, the numbers are devastating. The NBC/WSJ survey, when combined with a previously released NPR study of likely voters in 70 competitive House districts by Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg and Republican Glen Bolger, point to an outcome for Democrats that is as serious as a heart attack. Make no mistake about it: There is a wave out there, and for Democrats, the House is, at best, teetering on the edge.

To be sure, things could change in the four months between now and November 2. The GOP's failure to get Republicans to vote in the May 18 special election in Pennsylvania's 12th District underscores that the party can't just sit back and await spontaneous combustion in terms of turnout. Still, the potential is here for a result that is proportional to some of the bigger postwar midterm wave elections. These kinds of waves are often ragged; almost always some candidates who looked dead somehow survive and others who were deemed safe get sucked down in the undertow. That's the nature of these beasts. But the recent numbers confirm that trends first spotted late last summer have fully developed into at least a Category 3 or 4 hurricane.

Given how many House seats were newly won by Democrats in 2008 in GOP districts, and given that this election is leading into an all-important redistricting year, this reversal of fortune couldn't have happened at a worse time for Democrats.

How Bad Could 2010 Really Get For Democrats?

tpelia@yahoo.com (Tom Elia) — Thu, 15 Apr 2010 00:03:00 -0600

Real Clear Politics' Sean Trende:

... I think those who suggest that the House is barely in play, or that we are a long way from a 1994-style scenario are missing the mark. A 1994-style scenario is probably the most likely outcome at this point. Moreover, it is well within the realm of possibility - not merely a far-fetched scenario - that Democratic losses could climb into the 80 or 90-seat range. The Democrats are sailing into a perfect storm of factors influencing a midterm election, and if the situation declines for them in the ensuing months, I wouldn't be shocked to see Democratic losses eclipse 100 seats.
...

If brand damage is truly seeping over into Congressional races - and the polling suggests it is - then the Democrats are in very, very deep trouble this election. There is a very real risk that they could be left with nothing more than Obama's base among young, liberal, and minority voters, which is packed into relatively few Congressional districts. It would be the Dukakis map transformed onto the Congressional level, minus the support in Appalachia. That would surely result in the Democratic caucus suffering huge losses, and in turn produce historic gains for the GOP this November.

Who is more embarrassing to the Irish race?

tpelia@yahoo.com (Tom Elia) — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 10:14:06 -0700

Poll: US Isolationism at Historic Post-WWII High?

tpelia@yahoo.com (Tom Elia) — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:02:00 -0700

If so, this isn't good.

Real Clear Politics' David Paul Kuhn writes:

The United States has taken a turn toward isolationism likely unseen in the post War World II era, according to a new poll by the Pew Research Center and historic Gallup polling.

For the first time in more than four decades a plurality, 49 percent, believe the United States should ?mind its own business internationally and let other countries get along the best they can on their own,? Pew reported Thursday; only 44 percent of Americans' disagree.

The State of Political Debate in America: Who Wrote This?

tpelia@yahoo.com (Tom Elia) — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:21:00 -0700

The following excerpt from a recently published quote speaks volumes about the state of political debate in the US:

The US is now bankrupt ... morally compromised and hanging on to global support only because of a new president who is even now being assaulted viciously at home for such grievous crimes as trying to get more people access to health insurance.

The question is, who wrote this? (Link below)

Here's a hint:

Here's the link.

Gallup: Republicans Edge Ahead of Democrats in 2010 Generic House Vote

tpelia@yahoo.com (Tom Elia) — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 14:11:00 -0700

Gallup's Jeffrey M. Jones writes:

Republicans have moved ahead of Democrats by 48% to 44% among registered voters in the latest update on Gallup's generic congressional ballot for the 2010 House elections, after trailing by six points in July and two points last month.

Of the poll, Byron York writes:

After years of trailing far behind Democrats, Republicans have now surpassed Democrats as the public's choice in the 2010 congressional elections. ... It's an extraordinary turnaround for the GOP. Last July, Democrats held a six-point lead. Last December, Democrats held a 15-point lead. At one point in 2007, Democrats held a 23-point lead, and for all of that year, 2007, Democrats held a double-digit lead.

The new Republican lead is the result of a dramatic move of independents toward the Republican party. In the new poll, according to Gallup, the GOP leads among independents, 52 percent to 30 percent -- whopping 22-point margin. Last month, the Republican lead among independents was just nine points, and in July, the GOP lead was a single point. So among independents, the Republican lead has gone from one point to 22 points in less than six months -- with much of lead accumulating in the last month.

Poll: Pick the Hyperbolist

tpelia@yahoo.com (Tom Elia) — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 13:58:00 -0600

Who is responsible for this remarkable piece of hyperbole?

... conservatism is over in America as a coherent governing philosophy in America. It is now an atavistic, militarist, paranoid, reactionary religious movement with no constructive proposals for addressing the actual world we live in.

And like most contemporary movie-zombies, its own death seems to have galvanized its aggression, passion and relentless march toward ever more extremes.

(link at bottom of post)

Which noted hyperbolist wrote this?

Here is the link.

Who's Dumber: Michael Moore, or the People Who Believe Him?

tpelia@yahoo.com (Tom Elia) — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 14:15:00 -0600

From a Time magazine interview:

Michael Moore: The wealthy have never liked to pay for the labor that enriches them. Ever since slavery was eliminated, they have been trying to keep it as close to slavery as they can without violating the slave laws.
...

Time magazine: But aren't you really a model capitalist? You raise money. You hire people. You create a product and sell it to the public, bearing the risk and gaining the rewards that goes along with it.

Michael Moore: ... Capitalism would have never let me be a filmmaker, living in Flint, Michigan with a high school education. I was going to have to make that happen myself.

51% View Tea Parties Favorably, Political Class Strongly Disagree

tpelia@yahoo.com (Tom Elia) — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 10:12:00 -0600

A new Rasmussen poll shows that 51% of those polled viewed favorably the 'Tea Party protests,' while only 13% of the 'political class' viewed the protests favorably.

Rasmussen reports: (emphasis added)

While half the nation has a favorable opinion of last Wednesdayâs events, the nationâs Political Class has a much dimmer viewâjust 13% of the political elite offered even a somewhat favorable assessment while 81% said the opposite.

There are also these unsurprising findings:

One-in-four adults (25%) say they personally know someone who attended a tea party protest. That figure includes just one percent (1%) of those in the Political Class.
...

On many issues, there is a bigger gap between the Political Class and Mainstream Americans than between Mainstream Republicans and Mainstream Democrats. That was true on the tea parties, but Mainstream Republicans do express a more positive view of the protests than Mainstream Democrats. Still, a majority (54%) of Mainstream Democrats had a favorable opinion of the tea parties.

Out of touch much?

The Illinois Resignation Game: Who's Next?

tpelia@yahoo.com (Tom Elia) — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 13:56:00 -0700

Today, the governor of Illinois called for a US senator from Illinois to resign.

A few weeks ago, a senator from Illinois was calling for a governor from Illinois to resign.

It's getting hard to keep track. What will happen next?

Who is more embarrassing to the Irish race?
	Andrew Sullivan
	Chris Matthews
	Dylan Ratigan
	I don't know, but I need a Guinness.

Free polls from Pollhost.com

Who wrote this?
	A MoveOn.org spokesman
	Pick a college professor
	Harold Meyerson
	Markos Moulitsas
	Andrew Sullivan
	Tiffany Greenberg, third grader
	Keith Olbermann
	Paul Krugman
	Opinion writer, The Nation
	Pick a mainstream reporter

Free polls from Pollhost.com

Which noted hyperbolist wrote this?
	Michael Moore
	Markos Moulitsos
	Ralph Nader
	Andrew Sullivan
	Paul Krugman
	Harold Meyerson
	Keith Olbermann
	A MoveOn.org spokesman
	Pick a college professor
	The possibilities are too limitless to hazard a guess

Free polls from Pollhost.com

Who's Dumber: Michael Moore, or the people who believe him?
	Michael Moore
	The people who actually believe Michael Moore

Free polls from Pollhost.com

Which Illinois pol will next ask another Illinois pol to resign?
	The Gov of IL will ask the Mayor of Chicago to resign.
	The Mayor of Chicago will ask the IL Atty Gen to resign
	The Speaker of the IL House will ask the Mayor to resign
	The former Gov. of IL will ask the Mayor to resign
	One IL Senator will ask another IL Senator to resign
	One IL Senator will ask the Mayor to resign
	The former IL Gov will ask the current IL Gov to resign
	One IL Sen will ask an IL congressman to resign
	Both IL senators will ask the Mayor to resign
	Three IL congressman will ask both IL Senators to resign

Free polls from Pollhost.com