Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

POLL: ARG Wisconsin


American Research Group

Wisconsin
Clinton 49, Obama 43... McCain 46, Huckabee 42, Paul 4

 

Comments
polsaa:

Another ARG poll that is way out of line with every other recent poll in this race. My prediction is that they will prove to be wrong on this one just as they have proven to be wrong in almost every other primary contest where they have been an outlier.

____________________

Aaron:

if you look at the last ARG poll (feb 6-7) clinton was up 50-41. Since then, we've seen three polls showing Obama leading by a steady 4-5 point margin. In this new ARG, he's cut 3 points into her "lead." That tells me he's winning the undecideds and stretching his actual lead from 4 to 7 or 8 points. ARG is the only polling outfit showing her with a lead.

____________________

aaron:

Well, he's cut 3 points into her lead since the last outlier ARG poll showing her with a 9 point advantage. So he's probably widening his lead (here in the real world) from 5 to 8 points.

____________________

richard Pollara:

If you watched the Sunday talk shows this morning you had to believe that Mrs. Clinton's campaign was on life support. I am not a polling or demographics expert, but I haven't seen anything that shows that the support either have with their core groups has shifted much. The race is essentially a toss-up. I have two questions: First, is their any statistical evidence that "momemtum" which the media has portrayed as being critical, has played a part in this race? Second, is there anything which shows movement in or out of the candidates core groups? The only real movement which I have observed has been the shift in African-American voters to Mr. Obama. But hey, what do I know. I cast my first vote for George McGovern for President.

____________________

emcee:

Way off in Clinton's favor in Wisconsin.
Way off in Obama's favor in Texas.

They should switch the name from ARG to RNG.

____________________

Vern:

This Wisconsin thing is going to be close - perhaps a New Mexico repeat I fear - where we don't get an answer for weeks. I expect weather to play a significant role on Tuesday, as people who are not so enthused about voting will stay home. It is cold up here! This favors the exited base candidate. We all know who that is.

____________________

richard Pollara:

Just a quick note on the first ARG poll. It was taken on February 6-7. This was before the Obama winning streak. If there really was any bounce from those wins, should it not be reflected in a wider shift than three points? Isn't it more likely that the polls taken earlier in the week showed the bounce but not the return to earth?

____________________

Brad:

You have to hand it to ARG. They've been notoriously awful lately, yet they just keep polling and polling. RCP doesn't even include ARG in their averages anymore. According to ARG, Hillary should have won Iowa by 12, and Obama should have eeked out a mere 3-point victory in South Carolina.

____________________

Tony:

ARG is low on the SurveyUSA report card (although, ironically, ARG and SUSA were the only two to get Calif. correct).

Aaron, how can you project from a poll that you believe is flawed?

____________________

RS:

Interestingly, ARG says Senator Clinton leads Senator Obama amongst Democrats 58-32, while PPP (Obama +11) earlier gave Obama a 46-44 lead! Both say Obama leads among independents/others - ARG 60-35 and PPP 63-25. Also, ARG says independents/others are 38% of their sample, while I estimate PPP puts this fraction at ~24%. But the huge Clinton lead among Democrats as per ARG gives her the lead in that poll.
On the other hand, PPP says "if conventional turn-out, Obama leads 46-44, but we estimate young/African-American voters should turn out much more, so he leads 50-39." Or words to that effect. As someone said earlier, weather could have an effect as well. Besides, Senator Clinton apparently is leaving Wisconsin a day earlier than scheduled, perhaps giving the impression that she's written Wisconsin off. Wonder how that will affect her support.

Echoing Mark B's earlier calls, I wish these polling firms would give more details on their sample and screening process!

____________________

Eric Harris:

As a Wisconsin resident, I have a feeling that Barack Obama has a stronger lead that the polls show for a few key reasons:

1) Clinton has high negatives among men. If Obama's campaigning and heavy advertising are able to closely split the Wisconsin women vote, Obama wins.

2) In my Madison TV market, I've seen 15 Obama commercials this weekend, 1 Huckabee, 1 McCain, 0 Clinton. Obama is definitely putting forth the money here. And his commercials now highlight both his hope message and cite specific policies.

3) In my experience, the people of Minnesota have similar enough political values to be comparable to Wisconsin. Obama won there a few weeks ago with less momentum and with a large margin.

4) I attend college at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. Each campaign sent high profile speakers last week. Here are the turnouts:
Barack Obama: 16,000-20,000 in attendance
Chelsea Clinton: 600
Bill Clinton: 2,000

Now even if you account for the time of day, surely you would expect to see less of a disparity between a former president's speech and a presidential candidate. Obama visited the major colleges this week. Because of Wisconsin's open primary voting, all students need to vote is to show up at the polls with ID (a student ID works if they live in the dorms, making it even easier).

Summary: Clinton's negatives and a potential high young voter turnout will hurt her.

____________________

Anthony:

Well Obama should win the Madison area with all the students...but venues make a big difference in the number of people who turn out. The Clintons typically speak in smaller venues in order to bolster that they concentrate on issues. Obama likes stadiums because it puts the focus on his speechgiving/inspirational quality. I am a Clinton supporter but I think that this poll is probably off. I guess we'll find out soon enough.

____________________

roy:

Eric,

Minnesota was a caucus, so I wouldn't rely too heavily on it as an example, though to be sure (a) we weren't required to stay and caucus in order to vote, so the time requirement wasn't that great, and (b) turnout was so huge that it almost resembled a primary.

____________________

No state is for sure for Clinton vs Obama

Latest Rasmussen Poll for Pennsylvania 2.17.08
Obama 49-39 over McCain
McCain 44-42 over Clinton
Obama Fav/UnFav 31-16
Clinton Fav/UnFav 21-28
McCain Fav UnFav 12-16

____________________

James:

ARG and Zogby should have tea together.

____________________

Cokie Roberts:

I want Clinton to win more than I want the sun to rise tomorrow, but I do not believe this poll at all (anymore than I believe the Texas ARG one). I would guess Obama +7-9 on Tuesday.

____________________

Adam:

I like to be positive about the polls in Wisconsin. The gap should be positive for Hillary when you think about margin of error and the fact that the undecideds seem to swing slightly over to Hillary at the last minute.

I'm thinking it's going to be a matter of 1 or 2 delegates and just enough for both candidates to spin the news to look positive.

Also Clinton could pick up a win in the symbolic Washington Primary and argue that her support is not as gone as her opponents would like her to believe...

____________________

tony:

Eric -- Madison is not representative of the rest of the state (neither are college students). Perhaps this is why she didn't spend too much money advertising there.

____________________

Matt Weiss:

It's possible that the Clinton camp
a) knows it's gonna be very close in Wisconsin
b) knows that Obama will likely win that close vote
c) knows there isn't much that another day of campaigning in the state will do to change that
d) has "abandoned" Wisconsin a day early to give the appearance of having given up on the state, suggesting that internals show big movement his way. When that doesn't happen, and she finishes within 5% of him, she can claim a "comeback" win.

Or maybe I'm just overthinking.

____________________

michael:

ARG's record notwithstanding, if you look at the 4 polls from the 11th onwards, they increasingly trend for Clinton. So maybe there is hope... then again, that sounds like Obama-talk.

____________________

Sournot:

Let us all wait and see.

____________________

Brian:

I put SurveyUSA's poll ratings into a spread sheet, eliminated the Republican contests from the averages, and added data from the latest primaries. In short, it's hard to believe any are credible:

1) Quinnepac only 3.67 points off the mark (but only polled 3 states)
2) Research 2000 (5.83% off, 6 states)
3) Marist (6%, 2 states)
4) SurveyUSA (7.21, 14 states)
5) Stategic Vision (8%, 5 states)
6) Rasmussen (8.35%, 17 states)
7) Mason Dixon (9%, 12 states)
8) Gallup (9%, 2 states)
9) Zoghby (9.75%, 8 states)
10)Public Policy Polling (9.75%, 4 states)
11) ARG (11%, 12 states)
12)Insider Advantage (11.57%, 7 states)
13) Suffolk (12%, 3 states)

Highlights:

ARG off by more than 15% in Iowa, SC and CT, more than 20% in Illinois, and more than 10 in NH, Delaware and VA.

Strategic Vision off by more than 10% in NH and GA

Research 2000 off by 14% in Missouri

Rassmussen off by 20% in GA, 19% in Alabama, 14% in SC, 12% in Iowa, 11% in CA and VA, 10% in NH and Missouri, and 9% in Mass.

I think we're just going to have to wait for the votes to come in.

____________________

Abe:

"maybe there is hope... then again, that sounds like Obama-talk."

Come on now, first of all, hope is not a brand, we all (well, you and I at least) hope a democrat wins the whitehouse this year, hope our kids can stay healthy and won't force us to mortgage the house to get them through college.

Hope is good and not a brand, don't let the political rhetoric against "hope" sway you so =) Besides, I get the feeling that that "Obama-talk" is going to be exciting you a lot more than the McCain gloom and doom (and bomb-bomb Iran) talk a few months from now. Let's all work on this thing as s team working to pick the best captain, they'll still be friends afterwards, no reason for such antagonism now =)

Here's to the team Michael, Obama (my pick) or Clinton!

The quote above is perfect about the poll though:
"They should change their name form ARG to RNG"
Fantastic stuff.

____________________

Keith Pickering:

Hey, Cokie, nice to see you posting here. I agree with you on the probable margin. I was canvassing for Obama in LaCrosse on Saturday, a tough working class town if there ever was one, the kind of place that should be Clinton's demographic. What I found was almost zero interest in the primary, and almost zero support for either candidate. Though my compadres who canvassed the college found a lot of Obama support there. I'll be interested to see if how vote totals there turn out.

____________________

Nate:

I live in Wisconsin also and I must echo what Eric had said. There are a lot of factors that favor Obama currently.

1) Same day registration and voting; this favors the first time voters who have trended for Obama in the past.

2) Madison and Milwaukee make up the predominate blue spots of the state while the rest is purple with reddish hues: there's lots of independents.

3) Wisconsin has historically had a higher than average turnout among the 18-29 year old voters.

I think it'll be pretty close but Obama will come through in the end by at least 10 points.

____________________

G.G.:

Matt Weiss, and others picking up the media idiocy that Clinton is "abandoning" Wisconsin -- she is here through Monday night, just like Obama . . . who did abandon Wisconsin today, while she worked Milwaukee all day despite larger events being cancelled because of weather. And he will abandon Wisconsin again on Monday, returning only for one rally at night in Beloit, almost Illinois.

But she will have three rallies across the state on Monday. So the Obama camp apparently bought the media spin and had him abandon Wisconsin first. Of course, you won't see that on MSNBC or other national media -- but it really isn't harrrd worrrk to check local media online these days on your computers and not count on the idiots spouting nonsense on tv.

____________________

Adam G:

I really wish we could have two comment sections for each poll on this site: one section for people who will provide reasoned commentary (even if they support a candidate in that commentary) concerned primarily with the accuracy of polls and the science behind it, and the other section for all of the trolls who think somehow by fighting for the candidate with whom they are obsessed on pollster.com will somehow yield a better result for them...

.... this site was so much better when fewer people knew about it....

____________________

Gabriel:

Hi All, how will weather play in all this...It was nice to read this without all the overzealous Clinton and Obama supporters flaming the posts...

I almost though G.G. was going to go overboard but he held it together.

____________________

Joe Conason:

"I think it'll be pretty close but Obama will come through in the end by at least 10 points."

At least 10 points is not "pretty close."

____________________

John SFL:

A 10 point loss for Clinton would be pretty close compared to her losing margins in the past 8 contests.

Another thing that should be noted about the poll: it was taken on Friday and Saturday which probably skews to Clinton's demographics.

____________________

Shannon:

I think what we're seeing as far as the Obama momentum is the fact that he is more organized as evidenced by the fact that he has more contributors and more cash raised in just about every state. As this continues, I think the polls are going to be far less accurate because, even though the general population including independents and undecideds have made a choice, their participation will wane in comparison to the more committed voter. Historically, the most committed voters turn out in the primary season. No matter what the polls say, I see Obama's momentum continuing. And as far as ARG goes, they haven't gotten it right from the beginning so it makes no sense to look at a board that someone threw darts at in an attempt to predict an outcome.

____________________

tony:

how would a fri/sat poll skew results? just asking.

apparently clinton is still there: http://www.wausaudailyherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080218/WDH0101/80218036/1981

____________________

s.b.:

It's all about turnout. The demographic support is probably fairly accurate in every poll. What's different, for the most part is turnout ratios. These are essentially guesses for every primary. For example, hispanics doubled their historical turnout in California. Obama has energized his supporters to come out. It doesn't necessarily mean that many more people support him in any given state, especially primaries. Clinton has done much better in states where people could vote over longer periods of time. etc.

Turn out is mysterious, to a certain extent, event he female to male ratio in turnout makes a huge difference. You just have to wait and see.

____________________

Dave S:

It's all going to come down to turnout of independents and first-time voters. Clinton does tend to have an advantage with last-minute deciders (who I think would tend to be much more receptive to the "safe choice"), but Obama has been outweighing that with lopsided margins among independents (in open primaries) and first time voters who have decided in advance of election day. So this one will be interesting. I'm definitely not counting Clinton out... but turnout patterns are going to decide this thing -- and there, your guess is as good as anyone's! (And probably a bit better than ARG given their track record).

____________________

s.b.:

Sorry, I meant to say expecially caucuses do not reflect genuine ratios of suppport in a state just turnout in my previous post.

____________________

John SFL:

tony: My understanding is the Fri/Sat polling skews towards people who spend weekends at home and are therefore available to take polls. These tend to be older voters which are clearly Hillary's base.

I'm sure you could get a better explanation from someone else. I know it's been discussed here at Pollster.com before.

But based on ARG's reputation I'd say it's likely just a bad poll regardless of the day of the week. At least until one or two other polls show something similar.

____________________

Matt:

I know this is off subject, but what does everyone think about Intrade? A better indicator than the polls?

____________________

tony:

sfl - pollsters would stil try to get a representative sample. even if there are more older people at home on weekends, a pollster would limit the amount of older people included in the polling data. they are not reporting the votes of people who are home on the weekend, but likely democratic voters. This means that they try to get a sample that reflects the likely composition of Dem voters.

____________________

Smith:

This is the very close presidential candidate election, I've ever witnessed (at least in the democratic side). Though Obama won more states than Hillary, the competition are still alive.
Used Car Engines

____________________

Ruben:

While this poll appears to be off, I would not discount it. Frankly, remember most of the other polls are close to the margin of error although Obama is slightly ahead. The demographics one would think favor Clinton. So in short I think this is a tied race.

____________________

fred:

Some of my friends have been phonebanking and they are getting a 5.5-4 margin for Obama - so it looks like ARG will be wrong again tomorrow, and the rest of the polls will be more indicative of what is actually happening.

Anyone else want to comment about Clinton prolonging the campaign when it definitely seems to be over?

____________________

Ruben:

While this poll appears to be off, I would not discount it. Frankly, remember most of the other polls are close to the margin of error although Obama is slightly ahead. The demographics one would think favor Clinton. So in short I think this is a tied race.

____________________

Lisa:

I would expect most young people and college students don't even have land lines these days. Does this sort of polling favor older people as young people tend to just have cellphones now? Would somebody tell me if this factor would make a difference in the polling numbers?

____________________

tony:

anecdotes from phone banks are not scientific.

____________________

Bob Evans:

sorry tony, but you can substitute "arg" for "phone banks" in your post as well.


Lisa - cell phones are considered in polling - as they were in '04 - when everyone thought Kerry would win since young people don't have phone lines and therefore were not represented in polling. That, however, turned out to be wrong.

polling like this with a sample size so small (600) is susceptible to substantial errors, as we have seen in the past.

____________________

Nate:

There is a new poll from PPP that gives similar results to the previous one with a few points more for Obama:

Obama: 53 (50)
Clinton: 40 (39)

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Wisconsin_Release_021808.pdf

The poll also only shows 9% of their respondents as being in the 18-29 category. The 18-29 for the 2004 Democratic primaries had that number at 11%.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/primaries/pages/epolls/WI/

So, if trends continue has they have in other states, I expect that 18-29 number to jump up by a few points.

Note: Does anyone know what the html tag for links is? Its a little annoying to post the entire address.

____________________

Eric:

For HTML Links see the following site:
W3Schools HTML Links

____________________

Robert:

I am voting for Huckabee. He is the only one who is going to kill the IRS, and the only one who has actually been the top man in any organization. Question: if Hillary wins, will she once again kill off all her old business partners , confidants and guards?

____________________

Isaac:

Hi
Surprising NEWS NEW ARG POLL
What a waste of time of arguing. Here is the latest NEW poll of ARG itself http://americanresearchgroup.com/
dated Feb 17-18 Obama 52% Clinton 42%
What a contrast on Feb 15-16 they gave hillary the edge by 6% and a day later a 16% jump, having obama up by 10%
The poll talks by itself
God Bless

____________________

rowjimmy:

If you believe ARG, you would think that there was a 20 point change among women in 1-2 days.

I think ARG really does stand for "A Random Guess."

I think this spells trouble for Hillary, not because she appears likely to lose. But because expectations of her losing were moderated some due to the appearance of "close" polls leading up to the election. If she ends up losing by 13-18 points again, when she spent a fair amount of time there, I think it will be a very dark night in her camp. I don't think they expected to win. However, they probably expected to be within 4-7 points.

Polls are weird. I wish SUSA had done some Wisconsin ones. Relying on ARG and PPP the last few days has been pointless.

____________________

You know, the data is what the data is. I think ARG has pretty good at predicting the outcome. Anyways, like Isaac said, new poll out looks favorable for Obama.

____________________

rowjimmy:

I do not have the crosstabs for ARG, but even if the data are what the data are, it's pretty astonishing that there was a 20 point flip among female voters in 1-2 days. I think their more recent poll is closer to reality and their two earlier polls were fantasy. Unless Hillary did something incredibly odd in Wisconsin the last 48 hours, I have a hard time believing that such a transition occurred.

More than likely, they "fixed" their earlier problems and maybe included more independents/republicans in the primary tabulation.

Hard to say though, without cross-tabs.

____________________

Nick:

Most of the discussion here has been about Obama/Clinton, but is anyone else (besides that nutcase Robert) surprised that Huckabee is in striking distance of McCain in WI? I'm a Democrat, but it's a bad sign for Republicans when 42% or your party wants go out and cast what amounts to a "screw you" vote against your party's nominee.

____________________

rowjimmy:

"I'm a Democrat, but it's a bad sign for Republicans when 42% or your party wants go out and cast what amounts to a "screw you" vote against your party's nominee."

I don't know. I think that makes him more marketable to the independents he needs in the general election. For instance, I consider myself a Democrat, but I would seriously consider voting for McCain in the general election depending on who's the Democratic nominee.

McCain's appeal to moderate Democrats like myself may make up for his dreadful appeal to the GOP base. I figure, if the right cannot stand this guy, that alone makes him worth checking out. And he was my senator for 4 years in Arizona.

I think he will lose though, no matter who the Democratic nominee. But, I never thought Bush would serve 8 years.

____________________

Janet Reno:

Obama’s efforts to connect to the Republican Party, specifically Bush, and Dick Chaney, of the Halliburton Company, dates back to the Presidents Grandfather, Prescott Bush, and indeed Chaney was once an executive officer of Halliburton.

The American military pounds Iraq with Artillary, bombs, and the like, destroying large sections of cities, and infra-structures, then Halliburton comes in to rebuild. Halliburton and Halliburton associated companies have raked in ten’s of billions.

Obama is just like the BIG HALIBURTAN. Haliburton has contracted to build detention centers in the U.S. similiar to the one in Quantanammo Bay, Cuba. Halliburton does nothing to earn the Two Dollars for each meal an American Serviceman in Iraq eats.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/08/17/eveningnews/main636644.shtml

Halliburton was scheduled to take control of the Dubai Ports in The United Arab Emiirate. The deal was canceled when Bush was unable to affect the transfer of the American Ports.

Now we see what some might suspect as similiar financial escapading from the Democrats.

Two years ago, Iraq’s Ministry of Electricity gave a $50 million contract to a start-up security company - Companion- owned by now-indicted businessman (TONY REZKO) Tony Rezko and a onetime Chicago cop, Daniel T. Frawley, to train Iraqi power-plant guards in the United States. An Iraqi leadership change left the deal in limbo. Now the company, Companion Security, is working to revive its contract.
Involved along with Antoin “Tony” Rezco, long time friend and neighbor of Democratic Presidential hopeful Barack Obama, and former cop Daniel T. Frawley, is Aiham Alsammarae. Alsammarae was accused of financial corruption by Iraqi authorities and jailed in Iraq last year before escaping and returning here.

Obama should be vetted and disclose his connection to the criminal money generating underworld. Besides, his connections to the REZCO MAFIA types, his up-coming tax fraud charges — Obama needs to disclose why he is a Muslim and stop suppoting our intervention in IRAQ. It’s time to shove an introduction to this fake rip-off Obama and invite the thief pipsqueke to meet the Waukesheake Police Department.

____________________

edgeways:

Over the past few days I've come to the conclusion ARG is just completely whack. I'm not sure where the problem is but their polls seem to be consistently wrong, and not just slightly wrong, but very wrong. I think it is safe to cut them out of any future poll aggregating.

____________________



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