Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

POLL: ARG Pennsylvania Dems


American Research Group

Pennsylvania 4/11 through 4/13
Clinton 57, Obama 37

 

Comments
lsmakc:

"23% of likely Democratic primary voters say that excessive exposure to Obama's advertising is causing them to support Clinton."

the rocky/mccain factor? wait till gore and carter pile on. like greenspan, their tour of duty is over, we're not interested in anymore.

____________________

Mike_in_CA:

Clinton wins white voters 64-29 in this poll. Possible? Perhaps. Probable? Considering the slew of polls from last week, I dobt his support among whites dropped 10+ points. ARG had this race at 45-45 last week and now it's 57-37????

Per the first post:

23% of voters are MORE likely to support Clinton due to overexposure to Obama ads. NO mention of who these people supported FIRST. What a lame statistic. Naturally Clinton supporters are going to be more likely to support her after being overexposed to Obama's ads consistently. It would be like Obama supporters more likely to support Obama after seeing Clinton's ads constantly. What's important is which way UNDECIDEDS are going.

This poll seems a farce for those three reasons. There's a reason RCP doesn't include this in their poll "average".

____________________

Over at EI, I posit that this will be the harbinger of a bad week for Obama.

Also, I cover which polls were buried with late-Friday and Saturday-morning releases (Zogby and Rasmussen), and the reasons why (in Zogby's case, embarassment about their sponsor, and in Rasmussen's, burying bad news for the GOP).

____________________

lsmakc:

looks like the same stats as SUSA that y'all panned last week. golly this is a fun race.
btw: strong women who tend to be decisive about hillary also have a fair amount of leverage among their men. i noticed the same trend in ohio. watch that demo build as we head into the final hours.

____________________

Yellow Dog Democrat:

This is a sign of a huge problem for Obama. His comments about small town people clinging to religion and guns are really coming back to haunt him. If Obama loses big here it will be hard for him to show he can win the big industrial states in the general election. can you have a democratic nominee who is stronger in the red states than the blue ones?

____________________

the_real_truth:
____________________

the_real_truth:

This is a direct result of faulty advertising by the obama camp. He should have gone negative in Wisconsin when Hillary did.

He should be going negative in PA. You know, like showing the Teller of the Tall Tale of Tuzla in all her glory - basically exposing her to be the liar that she is. Instead he has too many feel good ads that get annoying after the 3rd time seeing them.

____________________

the_real_truth:

yellow -

arg is a joke. look at their flucations before the wisconsin primary. they were all over the place a few days before. I believe they just throw darts at a board to come up with their "numbers"

To answer your last question - "yes", and we will.

It is just a waiting game for Obama now - basically waiting for Hillary to get out of the "race", since the supers will not overrule the people. Plain and simple.

I like your "huge problem" falsehood though - are you a Clinton camp employee or just from team McBush?

____________________

Mike_in_CA:

Hillary was booed at the AAM meeting in Pitt this morning when she brought up Obama's "elitism".

Honestly, I don't think this "bitter" thing is playing outside of the DC Media. People ARE bitter and I think that if ANYONE besides Clinton and McCain, two of the richest, most "elite" people in this country, were the accusers it might have stuck. For example, when George Bush, a bit of a dimwit himself, accuses someone of being elitist it "sticks" a bit more. It's just NOT CREDIBLE coming from Clinton (or McCain, but to a lesser extent). You will see this play out, mark my words.

____________________

the_real_truth:

mike -

clinton is desperate - that's all there is to it. she can't win - now she is just trying to damage BO as much as possible before the general - so she can run in '12.

____________________

Knute:

True to form, ARG will probably come out with a quite different poll in several days - as they did in TX, OH, and WI, when, by comparison they started looking embarrassingly off the mark.

I don't know about the internals of their organization, but I suspect they are able to pull the trigger more quickly (smaller sample size, etc.), but also lack the control of some of the other pollsters. It kind of depends upon whether you want to be fast -- or accurate.

Also, it isn't apparent who their client is (or even if they have one for every poll), but one wonders, for all pollsters, who is paying for the poll, and what subtleties of bias might affect their results.

One could also look at this two ways: 1. a morale booster for the Clinton crowd, or 2. a way to lower expectations for Obama.

After this poll HRC really has to finish higher up in the double digits (as per her original expectations), or it will be a disappointment. I predict she won't do any better than Ohio - and her delegate win will be underwhelming.

____________________

FlyOnTneWall:

Knute,

I strongly, strongly suspect that we're witnessing two related phenomena. The first is that ARG makes its money off of omnibus polls. Let me quote from our illustrious blogger-in-chief:

Such are the pitfalls of omnibus surveys. A client can buy a question or two without having to bear the costs of fielding a complete survey. The disadvantage is that others questions may precede it that a client knows nothing about (except for those with the clout to insist that their questions come first)....Generally, commercial omnibus surveys include questions on a wide variety of different topics, which generally cover consumer products and services rather than political issues. However, it is always possible that a question asked early in an omnibus survey might have some biasing effect on a question asked later.


So ARG's wild swings are likely a result of the fact that most of its questions are tacked on to the unrelated surveys that generate the firm's revenue. Ask about internet usage, and Obama goes up, poll on kitchen appliances, and Hillary surges.

But I suspect there's a related effect. Some omnibus polling firms generate their business by being very good at what they do. These firms use their accuracy in political surveys to generate publicity, and generally sign up media organizations to defray the costs of the political polling. ARG seems to operate on another model. It's aiming for a lower tier of the corporate world, fine-tuning marketing strategies. No one is defraying the costs of these political questions (aside from a small number of subcribers paying a few hundred dollars apiece to see the raw data). So I'd suggest that ARG is much less scrupulous about how it compiles its polls. After all, wild swings generate headlines for the somewhat-obscure operation, and there's no such thing as bad publicity. That may make them less focused on getting the numbers right - getting them wrong can be just as profitable. Whereas other firms tend to put the political questions first, I'd bet ARG - a low rent operation - saves them for last, after the paying clients have gotten their results. I don't know that, of course, because ARG is probably the least transparent operation out there. But until they release their entire surveys or certify that the political questions are always asked first, I'd throw their data in the garbage. They may well be right this week, but there's simply no way we've seen a twenty point swing in the past week, so if so, they were wrong then.

____________________

Mike_in_CA:

Thank you, Fly On the Wall. Your astute analysis is appreciated on this increasingly-partisan sight. I have always thought there were major problems with ARG. I suspect you are right about the "bad polls generate headlines" business. No WAY this thing went 45-45 to 57-37 in one week. No WAY in Hell. I was a stats major in undergrad, its virtually impossible barring some major event. That said, I think ARG is trying to play up this "bitter" thing as a major event, hence swinging their results substantially.

____________________

Knute:

Thanks, Fly..., this is one of most informative comments I have seen on this site.

Even more now, I feel this poll is doing no favors to HRC. The mainstream media will report "Clinton up by 20 pts. in PA." This will then stick in the public mind, and anything less will look mediocre.

Still, several times I've heard the parrots on the cable news channels lifting from pollster.com. Unlikely, tho, that they will repeat something that takes any brain-power to process.

____________________

Dan:

It is also worth pointing out that the only times this whole election cycle that Obama has received less than 40% of the vote were when Edwards was still in the race and/or drew a large share of the vote (IA, NH, OK). And Arkansas, of course.

The notion that he would get on 39% in PA, while possible, is rather implausible.

____________________

Pat:

There is some good news for Obama as a result of these polls (ARG and SUSA) and the controversy over small towns:

- ARG & SUSA are setting the expectation for Clinton to win PA by a large margin close to 20 points. If Obama gets close to 10 points, he will outperform expectation. If he gets within 5 points, he wins.

- This small town controversy and Clintons response to it is so over the top that it might actually turn-off some of Clinton´┐Żs more educated voters. Any gains in rural PA might be off-set by more loss among educated voters.

- When Clinton is on the attack and teaming-up with McCain against Obama, she looks mean and her negatives go up.

Let's give this one more week and I suspect we will see a different outcome.

____________________



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