Too Large of Democrat Advantage In Recent LA Times/Bloomberg Polls

superdude17* · #1 (**permalink**) 06-25-2008, 05:02 PM

Quote:

A well-known Republican research firm argues that the voter pool tapped for the new L.A. Times/Bloomberg poll was too skewed toward Democrats -- a challenge that causes the GOP strategists to question the double-digit lead the survey gave Barack Obama over John McCain.

The case against the poll, laid out in a memo sent out today by Public Opinion Strategies, in turn sparked a response from survey director Susan Pinkus, who stood by its methodology and findings.

Part of the dispute reflects a long-standing disagreement between independent pollsters and partisan operatives (something The Times wrote about four years ago) -- whether or not to tinker with a poll to make sure its respondents reflect the nation's political composition at some fixed point, such as the most recent election.

Pinkus, like most nonpartisan pollsters, rejects that notion. Discussing the current survey, she says, "The poll was weighted slightly, where necessary, to conform to the Census Bureau’s proportions of sex, race, ethnicity, age and national region. The poll was NOT weighted for party identification since party ID is a moving variable that changes from one election to another, or when one party may be favored more than the other."

As a result, the survey simply asked respondents their party affiliation or inclination, and came up with this breakdown: 39% Democratic, 22% Republican, 8% something else, 4% refused to say.

There's the rub, insists the memo from Bill McInturff, Liz Harrington and David Kanevsky. They write that these figures, and the 17 percentage-point gap between the two parties, are "greatly out of line with what most other surveys are reporting."

The memo cites several other recent polls in which the party ID gap ranged as low as plus 6 percentage points for the Democrats to as high as plus 14.

It then asserts: "McCain’s double-digit deficit is not a reflection of reality, simply a result of an unusual party identification result in this survey.... If party identification on the L.A. Times survey is recalculated to ... 29% GOP / 39% Dem / 27% Ind / 5% Don’t Know/Refused, the ballot would be 40% McCain – 47% Obama."

Pinkus responds that ...

... while the result for self-described Democrats may seem high, "this is what the poll got from a random sample of 1,233 adults nationwide, including 1,115 registered voters (which includes listed, unlisted and cell phone users)."

She also notes: "These days, the Republicans are not doing well -– (in the new poll) 78% think the country is seriously off on the wrong track, 82% think the economy is doing badly, 75% said the country is worse off economically since George Bush became president almost eight years ago, and more voters blame Bush and his administration for the rise in gas prices. Only 23% of voters and all Americans give Bush a positive job approval rating (the worst rating since President Nixon's last days in office). With all the negatives associated with the Republican Party and President Bush, I am not surprised that the public would move away from the party in power."

You can count on this type of argument over poll results flaring periodically during this campaign ... and in future races.

The Public Opinion Strategies memo makes this good point: "It is important that both the campaign, as well as reporters covering the campaign, not over-react to every single survey that is released. "

And, as pollsters such as Pinkus continually caution the journalists they work with, surveys are useful for spotting trends but they also are only a snapshot of a particular moment in time.

So even though there were 17% more dems used, he only had a 15% lead? LOL thats got to hurt...

DuH2 · #2 (**permalink**) 06-25-2008, 05:49 PM

They pulled the same nonsense with Kerry.
.

White Fox · #3 (**permalink**) 06-25-2008, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by superdude17*

So even though there were 17% more dems used, he only had a 15% lead? LOL thats got to hurt...

And they say that all the polls say so so it must be true! Won't they be in for a surprise when the election is too close to call 'till the very end.

superdude17* · #4 (**permalink**) 06-25-2008, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by White Fox

And they say that all the polls say so so it must be true! Won't they be in for a surprise when the election is too close to call 'till the very end.

cnn's jumping all over it too. i was flipping for ~ 1 hr. today and they didn't even mention the Gallup, the latest poll. Just last weeks numbers.

How about we start a war against the media. President Bush please send all troops to Atlanta and Rockefeller Plaza.

White Fox · #5 (**permalink**) 06-25-2008, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by superdude17*

cnn's jumping all over it too. i was flipping for ~ 1 hr. today and they didn't even mention the Gallup, the latest poll. Just last weeks numbers.

How about we start a war against the media. President Bush please send all troops to Atlanta and Rockefeller Plaza.

Fox news is on the march, my friend!

Ziggae_6 · #6 (**permalink**) 06-25-2008, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by superdude17*

So even though there were 17% more dems used, he only had a 15% lead? LOL thats got to hurt...

What is your source for that article you posted? Interesting that an article would say "The Public Opinion Strategy memo makes this good point..." and "well known Republican research firm" . This doesn't sound like a news article by a neutral media.

superdude17* · #7 (**permalink**) 06-25-2008, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggae_6

What is your source for that article you posted? Interesting that an article would say "The Public Opinion Strategy memo makes this good point..." and "well known Republican research firm" . This doesn't sound like a news article by a neutral media.

LA Times Blog

Mack · #8 (**permalink**) 06-25-2008, 07:26 PM

I think a lot of people are embarrassed to claim Republican as their party affiliation nowadays. Not long until "conservative" becomes a political slur.

Young Republican · #9 (**permalink**) 06-25-2008, 07:37 PM

I like telling people I'm a Republican. It's a good way to assert myself as a guy people don't wanna mess with.

White Fox · #10 (**permalink**) 06-25-2008, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mack

I think a lot of people are embarrassed to claim Republican as their party affiliation nowadays. Not long until "conservative" becomes a political slur.

I think that "neo-con" will become a political slur, not conservative.

Most people in this country don't even know what "conservative" actually is, though that doesn't remove the possibility that it would be used that way (as "fascist" is used and even more people don't know what that means).

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
DCCC has 6-1 Cash Advantage	f0ca1	Elections & Campaigns	0	04-21-2008 02:07 AM
Tough Times at New York Times: Circulation To Dip Below 1 Million	superdude17*	Media & Commentators	8	04-09-2008 09:56 PM
Worst Eight Years In Recent Times	crestwood33	Political Opinions & Beliefs	26	03-11-2008 06:07 PM
Washington Times To â€˜Apeâ€™ The NY Times	SweetnessBlog	Political Blogs	0	02-27-2008 08:10 AM
Recent Polls in Swing States	JP5	Elections & Campaigns	25	09-28-2004 12:12 PM