May 06, 2008
What's Up With The National Polls?
Last week, Democratic pollster Mark Mellman used his column in The Hill to argue that one could use "same-poll to same-poll comparisons" to argue that the controversy over Barack Obama's "bitter" comments had either no impact or a great deal of impact on the Pennsylvania primary. "In addition to providing jobs for pollsters," he wrote, "proliferating polls now give everyone the evidence to prove their favorite theory." He drew specific examples from the lesser known pollsters active in statewide contests that are typically derided by the polling establishment and the mainstream media.
Over the last 48 hours, however, we have seen Mellman's point proved by the country's most respected and well established polls and media organizations. As Gallup editor in chief Frank Newport noted in his Gallup Guru blog:
Two different headlines today in the New York Times and USA Today about the impact of the Jeremiah Wright controversy came to different conclusions about Jeremiah Wright and Barack Obama. The Times’ headline: “ In Poll, Obama Survives Furor; but Fall Is the Test”, while USA today headlines: “Flap over pastor pulls Obama down, poll finds”.
And for those who missed it, ABC's Gary Langer briefly summarized the conflicting numbers:
Briefly: Times/CBS has Barack Obama +12 vs. Hillary Clinton, with a headline saying Obama “survives furor” over the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. USAT/Gallup has Clinton +7, saying the flap over Wright “pulls Obama down.” Adding to the mix is Gallup’s daily poll, which has Obama +4.
These polls also differ in their general election match-ups: Times/CBS has Obama +11 and Clinton +12 vs. John McCain, while USAT/Gallup has them basically tied. Gallup daily has Clinton-McCain tied, McCain +5 vs. Obama.
And just in overnight: AP/IPSOS weighs in with a national poll showing Clinton +7 over Obama, with Clinton +5 and Obama +4 over McCain, spawning a thousand different headlines, no doubt (as AP stories always do).
Why all the confusion? Langer has a nice summary of the various methodological quirks that may or may not explain the differences between the Times/CBS and Gallup polls, though his bottom line is the most important take-away point. This episode, he writes,
[Is] a reminder that all polls – even good-quality ones – are done differently, and don’t always get the same results or engender the same analysis. And that horse-race results, in the midst of a close and unsettled campaign, may be particularly vulnerable to these kinds of influences.
Another way to make the same point. Look at our chart for the national Democratic primary polls as captured this morning It plots points for every survey released since January 2007 (captured this morning).
Let your eyes focus, for a moment, not on the the lines but on the cloud of dots surrounding each line. Each dot represents an individual poll. The dots are a bit more dense lately, a pattern explained mostly by our inclusion of daily tracking polls by Gallup and Rasmussen Reports since January 2008 (note: we plot only ever third or fourth day of each survey so we their rolling average samples do not overlap). However, the pattern of variation -- the spread of points around each line -- is considerable but not any wider now than at any other point over the last 17 months.
What is different right now is that the gap between Obama and Clinton is very close. So some polls show Clinton ahead, some show Obama ahead and given the sate of the race and we are paying much more attention to the small differences in individual polls than we usually do. Random error may explain some of the variation, small differences in methodology (question wording, order, the particular sub-population that answered he question) explains the rest. Either way, the cloud of variation -- bringing with it sometimes odd and conflicting "same-poll to same-poll comparisons" -- of "is an inherent part of political polling.
The variation is also the reason why we favor looking at all the polls in this "mashed up" graphical form rather than debating endlessly over which individual poll is closest to "right" at any moment.
-- Mark Blumenthal
May 06, 2008 in Divergent Polls, The 2008 Race
Comments
Question about "the Bradley Effect". Why do people claim it's evidence of (anti-black) racism on the part of voters? If I vote for Hillary because I think she's the better candidate, but tell the pollster I voted for Obama because I'm ashamed to admit that I didn't vote for the black candidate, how does that even possibly "show" that I'm an anti-black racist?
Just curious.
Posted on May 6, 2008 8:13 PM
Post a comment
08 STATEWIDE PRIMARIES
US
Dem,
Rep
Upcoming
Kentucky (5/20)
Oregon (5/20)
Puerto Rico (6/1)
Montana (6/3)
South Dakota (6/3)
2008 POLL DATA
Pres General Election:
McCain vs
US: Clinton, Obama
AL: Clinton, Obama
AK: Clinton, Obama
AZ: Clinton, Obama
AR: Clinton, Obama
CA: Clinton, Obama
CO: Clinton, Obama
CT: Clinton, Obama
DE: Clinton, Obama
FL: Clinton, Obama
GA: Clinton, Obama
HI: Clinton, Obama
ID: Clinton, Obama
IL: Clinton, Obama
IN: Clinton, Obama
IA: Clinton, Obama
KS: Clinton, Obama
KY: Clinton, Obama
LA: Clinton, Obama
ME: Clinton, Obama
MD: Clinton, Obama
MA: Clinton, Obama
MI: Clinton, Obama
MN: Clinton, Obama
MS: Clinton, Obama
MO: Clinton, Obama
MT: Clinton, Obama
NE: Clinton, Obama
NV: Clinton, Obama
NH: Clinton, Obama
NJ: Clinton, Obama
NM: Clinton, Obama
NY: Clinton, Obama
NC: Clinton, Obama
ND: Clinton, Obama
OH: Clinton, Obama
OK: Clinton, Obama
OR: Clinton, Obama
PA: Clinton, Obama
RI: Clinton, Obama
SC: Clinton, Obama
SD: Clinton, Obama
TN: Clinton, Obama
TX: Clinton, Obama
UT: Clinton, Obama
VT: Clinton, Obama
VA: Clinton, Obama
WA: Clinton, Obama
WV: Clinton, Obama
WI: Clinton, Obama
WY: Clinton, Obama
Sen General Election:
Alaska
Colorado
Louisiana
Maine
Minnesota
Mississippi (Special)
Nebraska
New Hampshire
New Mexico (Pearce)
New Mexico (Wilson)
North Carolina
Texas
Virginia
PUBLIC POLLSTERS
ABC News
AP-IPSOS
CBS News
Democracy Corps (D)
Diageo/Hotline Poll
Economist/YouGov
EPIC/MRA
The Field Poll
FOX News
GWU/Battleground
Gallup
Harris Interactive
IBD/TIPP
ICR - International Communications Research
LA Times/Bloomberg
Mason Dixon Polling and Research
Marist Poll
Market Shares Corporation
Mitchell Interactive
NBC/Wall Street Journal
New York Times
Opinion Research Corporation
Pew Research Center
Polimetrix
Princeton Survey Research Associates International
Public Agenda
Public Policy Polling
Quinnipiac University Poll
Rasmussen Reports
Selzer & Company
Suffolk University Political Research Center
Survey USA
Time/SRBI
Washington Post
World Public Opinion
Zogby International
POLL BLOGS AND SITES
Political Arithmetik
Crosstabs.org
The Polling Report
Electoral-Vote.com
R. Chung's Graphics
Prof. Wang's State Poll Meta-Analysis
Prof. Pollkatz Pool of Polls
Slate: Election Scorecard
Public Opinion Pros
Frank Newport: Gallup Guru
Carl Bialik: The Numbers Guy
Poll Positions: Kathy Frankovic
The Numbers: Gary Langer
Washington Post: Behind the Numbers
SURVEY RESEARCH ORGANIZATIONS
American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR)
The National Council on Public Polls (NCPP)
Council of American Survey Research Organizations (CASRO)
The World Association for Public Opinion Research (WAPOR)
The Council for Marketing and Opinion Research (CMOR)
Marketing Research Association
ARCHIVES
May 11, 2008 - May 17, 2008
May 4, 2008 - May 10, 2008
April 27, 2008 - May 3, 2008
April 20, 2008 - April 26, 2008
April 13, 2008 - April 19, 2008
April 6, 2008 - April 12, 2008
March 30, 2008 - April 5, 2008
March 23, 2008 - March 29, 2008
March 16, 2008 - March 22, 2008
March 9, 2008 - March 15, 2008
All pollster.com archives
MysteryPollster.com archives





![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.pollster.com/blogs/nav-commenters.gif)

Good post... MB. Basic statistics. The more random samples (or polls) the better... Obama and Clinton are indeed very close and it is probably not going to change since so many have strong preferences for either... unless something really game-changing occurs.
Otherwise... picking and choosing polls that are advantageous makes good spin... too bad some journalists report the spin and not overall picture.
Posted on May 6, 2008 11:05 AM