Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
21 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Could someone tell me why internal polls are the most reliable? (Original Post) LAS14 Nov 2016 OP
presidential campaigns have more money Raidel Nov 2016 #1
They have info about the voters jcgoldie Nov 2016 #2
They have the state voter files vdogg Nov 2016 #3
Do we know why the polling companies don't have this info? LAS14 Nov 2016 #5
Money and resources is a major one. Drunken Irishman Nov 2016 #6
Money. It can cost millions to poll a single state vdogg Nov 2016 #9
I know in Florida polling companies have it. It's public data here. RAFisher Nov 2016 #12
True. My brother is really pissed over that. It's happy days for identity fraud. OnDoutside Nov 2016 #17
The campaigns have the most up to date information because Demsrule86 Nov 2016 #18
I think its all about the money they are willing to invest Doctor Jack Nov 2016 #4
Check out this detailed Op-Ed from Obama's 2012 campaign manager! futureliveshere Nov 2016 #7
Thanks! LAS14 Nov 2016 #11
Anytime.. :) futureliveshere Nov 2016 #14
Thank you. grossproffit Nov 2016 #20
My guess (speaking from a position of zero information on this topic) PoindexterOglethorpe Nov 2016 #8
yes, my understanding is they have more reason for really accurate polls Fast Walker 52 Nov 2016 #19
Loads of hype Awsi Dooger Nov 2016 #10
Also when your canvassing marlakay Nov 2016 #13

jcgoldie

(11,631 posts)
2. They have info about the voters
Thu Nov 3, 2016, 11:47 PM
Nov 2016

As I understand it, it isnt just random samples like public polling. They have access to a lot of information based on previous voting histories. It's a different animal.

vdogg

(1,384 posts)
3. They have the state voter files
Thu Nov 3, 2016, 11:51 PM
Nov 2016

They literally know where each and every voter is, their party affiliation, and their voter history and thus their propensity to vote. Public polls don't have this.

vdogg

(1,384 posts)
9. Money. It can cost millions to poll a single state
Fri Nov 4, 2016, 12:11 AM
Nov 2016

News organizations just aren't going to be able to afford to poll in that detail in al 50 states. They have to target their resources.

RAFisher

(466 posts)
12. I know in Florida polling companies have it. It's public data here.
Fri Nov 4, 2016, 01:14 AM
Nov 2016

For $5 the Florida Secretary of State will mail you a CD with gigabytes of voter data. Demographics (address,race, age, party) for every single voter in the state and a complete history of every Florida election he or she had voted in. So that's definitely not true in Florida because it's public data.

Demsrule86

(68,565 posts)
18. The campaigns have the most up to date information because
Mon Nov 7, 2016, 07:51 AM
Nov 2016

they go out and talk voters...polling Companies are working off the last election.

Doctor Jack

(3,072 posts)
4. I think its all about the money they are willing to invest
Thu Nov 3, 2016, 11:52 PM
Nov 2016

More money, means more samples taken, more up to date voter info, fewer assumptions they can make, etc. Taking a poll probably isn't a huge money maker for a media company but a campaign can afford to throw money at better quality polls because they don't have to make a profit after.

PoindexterOglethorpe

(25,855 posts)
8. My guess (speaking from a position of zero information on this topic)
Fri Nov 4, 2016, 12:09 AM
Nov 2016

is that they have a strong vested interest in getting it right every bit as much as they have a strong vested interest in supporting the candidate.

That said, I haven't a clue how they might sample compared to how other polls might sample.

For what it's worth, I recall seeing something some years back about the 1992 election, and how Bill Clinton's internal polls show he was likely to win. And their exit polls (almost no states had early voting back then) on election were such that by 10 am they knew Bill would win. But they had to play it cool until it was official.

 

Fast Walker 52

(7,723 posts)
19. yes, my understanding is they have more reason for really accurate polls
Mon Nov 7, 2016, 07:58 AM
Nov 2016

News outfits just want a story, and closer is better

 

Awsi Dooger

(14,565 posts)
10. Loads of hype
Fri Nov 4, 2016, 12:31 AM
Nov 2016

Sure, sometimes you'll nail it. That allows arrogant Op-Eds like the one linked in this thread from Obama's 2012 campaign pollster. We're supposed to be amazed and in awe.

However, that Op-Ed itself demonstrated how absurd the premise was. That 2012 race was Obama's second rodeo, not the first. If Obama's team had already demonstrated that internal polls are the ultimate gold standard and that public polls are mostly laughable, you wouldn't have Obama pulling the chief pollster aside on election eve of his second race and asking what is going on.

Maybe it takes a handicapper to understand that. I also have an advantage because I worked behind the scenes in another profession with tons of aura attached -- sports oddsmakers. The public always wants to believe Las Vegas has some type of mysterious behind the scenes knowledge. Yeah, like frantic phone calls to make sure employees actually show up. Like averaging power ratings to stick a pointspread on the board. Then you sit back and hope somebody outs you on the air, so you can pretend there is indeed a secret sauce.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Could someone tell me why...