Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

MO: 49% Blunt, 48% Carnahan (MSU 8/7-22)

Topics: Missouri , poll

Missouri State University for KY3
8/7-22/10; 785 registered voters, 3.5% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(KY3 release)

Missouri

2010 Senate
49% Blunt, 48% Carnahan (chart)

Job Approval / Disapproval
Pres. Obama: 47 / 49 (chart)
Gov. Nixon: 59 / 24 (chart)

 

Comments
dpearl:

This RV poll shows a much closer race than other surveys have reported based on LV data. I wish they would have provided a bit more info - they did an LV screen but then only reported the RV results. Why bother with the LV screen at all if they aren't going to report it?

____________________

seg:

dpearl:
My bet is that the LV results that did not fit their preconceptions and therefore they lacked confidence in them. Most likely, it showed a large rep "bias" (in the statistical sense of a deviation from the observed mean).

I say the latter because conservatives are a small minority in almost all universities, especially in the departments that would have carried this out. Academics are not notably superior to anyone else in maintaining actual objectivity.

____________________

tjampel:

% of Dems and Dem-leaners too high, certainly compared to likely voter model for MO. LVs should be used exclusively starting ...very soon if not right now.

Also...63.2% women in the survey...fatal error

____________________

seg:

dpearl:
Whoops! Should have said deviation from the true mean of the population sampled (RV).

____________________

Crimsonite:

Plus, when do 97% of the registered voter population even know the candidates this far out from election day. I could understand if this was late September but it's a Senate election in an off year. I highly doubt that many registered voters would even care.

____________________

VermontWisdom:

Although there is a gender disparity, there also appears to be an oversampling of the elderly. To be honest, I'm not paying attention to any polls until I see samples taken AFTER Labor Day. Then we'll see if there is a trend.

____________________

boomer40:

7-22? 16 days in the field??

____________________

Mogando669:

it's a bit early in the race for only 3% unknown/other/refuse/undecided rate.

Also, somehow they weigh it by Census Data instead of what the expected "likely voter" screen is supposed to look like. That can easily overweight Carnahan by over-estimating youth and underestimating enthusiasm

____________________

Farleftandproud:

Wouldn't it be funny if after Obama serves his second term, Governor Nixon runs for president as a Democrat? That would be all too funny if we had another president Nixon with a different party. During his first Press club dinner he can say "I am not a crook" "America is #1"

I know the Carnahan campaign from my facebook page, and they are well organized. I think she can connect well with younger voters and women voters.

____________________

HookedOnPolls:

Mentioning a second term for Obama in the same sentence with the word funny is__________

(fill-in the blank)

____________________

dpearl:

"My bet is that the LV results that did not fit their preconceptions and therefore they lacked confidence in them."

SEG: You are wrong - it wasn't the folks on the academic side that did this. I e-mailed Brian Calfano, the Director of the Missouri State University Poll. He said the KY3 group only asked for the RV results but he ran the LV model himself and was happy to share the report with me. For the LV sub-sample the poll had Blunt up by two: 49.7% to 47.7%.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

Yeah, they said that about Bill Clinton too. Obama's only hardship I think with the voters is his skin color, and his ethnicity, but Bill Clinton had similar policies as Obama and a Whitewater scandal, and a wandering eye with Gennifer Flowers and Paula Jones in 1994. I thought things looked pretty bleak for him too, and trust me, at the time I was less sympathetic to Clinton than I am about Obama. Our economy was 10 times better because, the economy was much better in the 1990's worldwide. Obama inherited a weak economy, yet it isn't all that great in other countries either.

____________________

Bigmike:

Crimsonite

I can believe 97% of RV have an opinion. They are both from political families with a long history in the state.

____________________

dpearl:

One more thing about the discrepancy between this poll and others on the Missouri senate race. The press release notes that "The Missouri-wide survey results were weighted according to the following variables: age, sex, income, and geographic location within the state." Thus, they weight the RV sample results so they reflect the registered voter population in the state.

Now consider the LV sample. Here a "likely voter" is someone who says they are likely to vote and also has an opinion on the senate race (i.e. people are excluded if they are not sure about how they will vote). The results I note above (49.7% Blunt to 47.7% Carnahan to 2.6% other) are for the likely voter subsample (N=629) but using the weights applied to the RV sample to align it back with the RV population.

A pollster like Rasmussen will use weights that align the sample back to a perceived model of the population of likely voters based on things like voter "enthusiasm." This is, of course, where controversy about the different ways of handling the LV designation arises. As the election draws closer, more information is available to do the modeling well, so nearly everyone does that and the polls come more into alignment with each other.

An interesting P.S.: Dr. Califano mentioned in an e-mail to me that if he didn't weight at all his results would look close to those of other surveys - Blunt up by 9.

____________________

dpearl:

"I can believe 97% of RV have an opinion. They are both from political families with a long history in the state."

BigMike: Actually this survey ONLY reports those with an opinion (voters who say "not sure" are excluded from the results tables). 97% preferred one of these two candidates and the rest preferred someone else. You have to look closely at the tables and see what the "N" was for each question if you want to tease out how many did not have an opinion.

____________________

seg:

dpearl:
"SEG: You are wrongFor the LV sub-sample the poll had Blunt up by two: 49.7% to 47.7%."

This makes at least the third time today I have been wrong about something. I am having a good day.

Wow! You go to a lot of trouble for a comment unless it is something you would do for your job, anyway. Now that classes have started and grant final reports are coming due, I should not even be doing this much.

In any case, all of your posts this time were interesting and informative. I wish all pollsters would share the LV assumptions as well as the raw results. It would make it easier to compare results.

Perhaps if your friend shared how both LVs were done and why, we would learn some really useful things.

As much I wish Ras and all would share their methods in depth, I realize that it is not unreasonable for them to treat them as trade secrets. If they don't keep secrets, polls would become commodities done by the low bidder.

____________________

seg:

Cordoba mosque:
Several days ago I wrote of my suspicions/fear that the Cordoba mosque could be a front for Saudi Wahabbist. If so, it would inevitably turn into yet another mosque recruitment center for terrorists.

Several liberal commenters I respect stated with great certainty that there was a great deal of evidence that this mosque was truly the work of peace-loving Muslim moderates.

I accepted their assurances, perhaps wrongly. Apparently, just as I feared, a Saudi prince notorious for financing Wahabist radicals/terrorists is heavily involved in financing this thing, as are important members of the Muslim Brotherhood, the group responsible for forming Hamas and other terror groups.

The day after 9-11, the Saudi government withdrew virtually all of their nationals from this country, apparently fearing reprisals. Reprisals would have been the right word since 9-11 was financed, organized, and executed mostly by Saudi nationals.

Wahabbists should be classified as a hate group. They are very clear that they intend to destroy Jews, Shiites, gays, and, if we do not covert, all of we infidels. Wahabbist mosques are not a religious issue and not a religious freedom issue. They are a hate/terrorist group motivated, in part, by fanatical religious beliefs. The next 9-11 will operate from a US mosque. We are fools to allow them or their "charities" into this country.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/545180/201008261900/Mosques-Saudi-Patron.htm

____________________

dpearl:

SEG: So the principal allegation here is that Al-Waleed donated $300K to one of Feisal Rauf's charities. I would make three comments that might be important in interpreting that -

1. This is a small percentage of the total funding of Rauf's charities (other supporters include the Rockefeeler Brothers Foundation, the William & Mary Greve Foundation, the Danny Kaye and Sylvia FIne Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation of NY, etc....)

2. That donation is not related to funding the Park 51 Islamic Cultural Center, and

3. Al-Waleed also owns a 7% share of News Corporation. That's a $2.3 billion dollar investment in the parent company of Fox News.

Do you believe that Fox News is a Wahabbist organization?

____________________

gabe:

This poll has a lot of problems with it. First off the sample of women is very very high as is the percentage of Dems and leaners in a if not red than purple state. Moreover they used a RV model but did not report oin LV results. What is up with that?

____________________

Chris V.:

seg:

I imagine you are the sort of person who, had you lived during WWII, would have been a strong supporter of the Japanese internment camps.

Yes, let's stigmatize an entire demographic of people as threatening instead of taking the time to find the few of them who actually are. It's just easier that way.

____________________

gabe:

I also take another issue with this poll and that is on the 8th CD race. Emerson is losing to a unknown Democratic candidate. This means in that race that the GOP advantage in partisan ID and in the nationl environment means nothing here. I call BS on that race. I lean more towards PPP and Ras's polls on the Senate race with Blunt up around 10.

____________________

dpearl:

"ne you are the sort of person who, had you lived during WWII, would have been a strong supporter of the Japanese internment camps."

Chris V: Looking at the totality of SEG's posts on this site - I think that is very unfair.

____________________

dpearl:

"... you are the sort of person who, had you lived during WWII, would have been a strong supporter of the Japanese internment camps."

Chris V: Looking at the totality of SEG's posts on this site - I think that is very unfair.

____________________

seg:

dpearl:
I am not sure that a company can legally prevent someone from buying their stock, but they and Cordoba can refuse a gift.

More importantly, as Bob Woodward repeated so often, "Follow the money."

NewsCorp is a good investment. That is grounds enough to put your money on it. A charity is a decision that is driven by your non-monetary goals.

Why would those who finance terror and hate provide support to those who supposedly oppose them? You would certainly be suspicious of a politician who is funded by groups whose goals he supposedly despises. The question would be not only why did he accept the money but what motivated them to donate it.

I am not saying Cordoba should not be built. The issue to me is that our government should be suspicious of any group who receives gifts from our enemies. That does not mean they should be arrested or harrassed, but they should be investigated. This particularly goes for foreign nationals. They have no right to be here and no right to fund anything here.

I am not concluding that Cordoba is a plot or a front. I am concluding that the US government and press should keeping digging in and see what they find.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"I am not concluding that Cordoba is a plot or a front. I am concluding that the US government and press should keeping digging in and see what they find."

That exact question was posed to Micheal Bloomberg and he answered: "We wouldn't be saying that if this were a synagogue or a cathedral."

Imam Rauf is a left-wing muslim. Read anything he's written and it's clear what he teaches would be anathema to anyone who symphathizes with Al-Qaeda or the more militant, bigoted wings of Islam. The fact that New York Dolls strip club is right around the corner from the site of Cordoba house is more than enough motivation for them to blow the whole block up if they could. Imam Rauf is far too much of an appeaser of the infidels in their opinion. He is probably worse than the infidels because he refuses to condemn them.

This only became an issue in an election year. NYTimes reported this issue a year ago.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

Do the voters of Missouri know Nixon is a Democrat? If he is so popular, why doesn't he go out and campaign for Carnahan, just like I think the slightly more conservative casey should campaign for Sestak.

2010 will pass, and this is clearly a time where the voters fear a fast changing government and don't yet understand what all of Obama's reforms mean to them.

____________________



Post a comment




Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.

MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR