Pollster.com

July 26, 2008

POLL: Rasmussen California (7/24)

By Eric Dienstfrey

Rasmussen Reports
7/24/08; 500 LV, 4.5%
Mode: IVR

California
Obama 52, McCain 42 (June: Obama 58, McCain 30)

By Eric Dienstfrey on July 26, 2008 4:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (10) | TrackBacks (0)

POLL: Research 2000 South Carolina (7/22-23)

By Eric Dienstfrey

Research 2000/
DailyKos.com (D)
7/22-23/08; 500 LV, 4.5%
Mode: Live Telephone Interviews

South Carolina
McCain 53, Obama 40

By Eric Dienstfrey on July 26, 2008 11:19 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

"Outliers" for 7/26

By Mark Blumenthal

Kathy Frankovic looks at the "experience gap" in foreign policy but wonders if it will matter.

Jon Cohen notes growing awareness that Barack Obama is a Christian.

Kyle Dropp reviews polls of Germans showing negativity toward the U.S. but a preference for Obama.

Alan Abramowitz examines the daily tracking polls , Gallup's data on swing states and joins Thomas Mann and Larry Sabato in decrying "The Myth of a Toss-up Election."

John Sides questions the clamied McCain gains in this week's Quinnipiac polls.

Marc Ambinder posts new data on independent voters from Alex Gage and Alex Lundry.

Chris Bowers sees Nader and Barr hurting McCain more than Obama.

David Hill says politicians of both parties are ignoring polls on energy policy.

Mark Mellman sees George Bush "sticking his toe into the mainstream of American public opinion on national security."

Gary Langer revisits the 2004 Dempsey-Shapiro survey on the partisan affiliation of the active duty military.

David Park says uncertain voters perceive little difference between Obama and McCain on the economy.

Political scientist Dan Hopkins quantifies (pdf) the Wilder effect (via Sides).

Continue reading ""Outliers" for 7/26"

By Mark Blumenthal on July 26, 2008 10:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (8)

July 25, 2008

A Different Approach to Measuring Vote Choice (and Lack of Choice)

By David Moore

In the recent release of the Granite State Poll, Andy Smith (director of the UNH Survey Center) noted that Barack Obama led John McCain by three percentage points, 46 percent to 43 percent, with 3 percent favoring another candidate, and 8 percent undecided. In the next paragraph, however, he noted that "only 51 percent of likely voters say they have definitely decided who they will vote for, 21 percent are leaning toward a candidate, and 28 percent say they are still trying to decide."

 

The second sentence may seem incompatible with the first - 8 percent of voters undecided, at the same time there are 21 percent leaning and another 28 percent still trying to decide - but it's a compromise that allows Smith to use the standard vote choice question, while still measuring the extent of voter indecision.

 

The standard forced-choice (who would you vote for if the election were held "today") approach produces results showing that more than nine in ten voters have already made up their minds about whom to support for president. Such a finding defies credulity, as I argued in a previous post, because of many other indicators that suggest a substantial proportion of voters have not even begun to think about the election. This was a particularly problematic result during the early primary season, when anyone who had even a dollop of experience with elections knew that primary voters had not made up their minds weeks and months ahead of their respective elections, despite what the polls said.

 

During the New Hampshire primary season, CNN's Keating Holland and Smith experimented with a different approach for measuring voter preferences. I had suggested a dichotomous question up front, asking if voters had made up their minds (or not) who to vote for on primary election day, but Holland and Smith came up with an alternative three-part response - to ask up front if voters had definitely decided whom to support on primary election day, if they were leaning, or if they were still trying to decide. Following this question, regardless of the answer, all respondents were asked the standard vote choice question, whom they would vote for if he election were held today.

 

With this format, the pollsters were able to determine how committed voters were to a choice in January (primary election day), and also to measure their top-of-mind preference if the election were held "today." Asking the undecided question first did not appear to influence respondents' willingness to give a preference to the second question, thus allowing CNN and the UNH Survey Center to report numbers that were comparable to what other polling organizations were doing - but still being able to indicate the size of voter indecision.

 

In the final pre-election poll, the CNN/UNH Survey Center results were as close to the actual outcome on the Republican primary as any of the other polling organizations. On the Democratic side, the polling results were similar to the average of the other polling organizations, showing Obama over Clinton, when in fact Clinton won. But CNN and the Survey Center were able to announce up front that with three days to go, 21 percent of the Democratic voters said they were still trying to make up their minds - suggesting the potential for movement.

 

Because the experiment appeared to provide additional insight into the state of voters' minds, Smith has continued to ask the undecided question up front in the general election polling. That's what gave him the results noted at the beginning of this post.

 

There are several ways to report the results. In accordance with standard practice, Smith focuses on the "today" results. Alternatively, he could focus on the results that treat the "still trying to decide" as though, in fact, they are undecided. Both results are shown in the table below:

 

 

 

 

A more detailed table of filtered results would show the following: