PRIMER ON PRESIDENTIAL POLLS
Tap into the growing interest, if not excitement, of the upcoming presidential elections. Party conventions lie just over the horizon, sure to produce a frenzy among our sharply divided population. Events slow on the financial front at this time of year. So let’s take a break, step back from economic and financial concerns, to cover some polling technicals, some specific presidential tally consequences, and other nuances pertaining the ubiquitous polls. The most prominent nowadays are managed by CNN/ USAToday/ Gallup. Some statistical detail will be covered, hopefully to satisfy longstanding curiosity of readers. To be sure, certain topics will be mentioned superficially if only to acknowledge their importance. All discussion applies directly to other types of polls besides voters, such as parents of high school students, or Social Security recipients, or members of sports health clubs, or people who suffer from arthritis, or the daily topics posed by CNBC. No personal political views will be expressed. My role is the marketing researcher, the statistical analyst. Sections at the end of this essay can be skipped, if the reader wants only technical information on polls. They are added for completeness.
LIKELIHOOD TO VOTE, VOTER TURNOUT
Over the past many years, my curiosity has been piqued by the physical voting process and the occasional disconnect between polls and final results. The link between voter preference and voting results lies in voter turnout. Pollsters refer to certain groups of supporters as “soft” or “dedicated” which helps to explain the disconnect. Loyalty is difficult to measure or quantify. So are motivation and initiative to go the extra mile to arrive at voting booths. Some intangibles are not subject to measurement. In the aftermath of surprisingly wide victories, like Clinton over elder Bush, or Carter over Ford, or Reagan over Carter, voter support for the loser was found to be soft. The presidential polls had failed to predict the decisive victory. The missing link was in voter turnout and initiative to make the effort. Pollsters have attempted to address the softness or dedicated characteristics of voter segments associated with certain candidates. The best researchers have actually made great progress in integrating the voter preference in conjunction with voter turnout likelihood. The statistical methods are greatly complicated, but the payoff is worth the effort in accuracy. Lazy or untrained researchers completely overlook this critically important factor.
EXIT POLLS
An impressive pollster practice in the last 20 years has been exit polls. They get voters coming and going. While summertime and early autumn polls can address the likelihood of election results, exit polls offer an immediate access to voters who are fresh on the scene. Some do not reveal their votes, which puts the Non-respondent Problem back on the analytic burner. Exit polls can conveniently delve deeply into why voters voted the way they did, what issues turned their vote, which demographic groups they come from. Certain traits are obvious like gender, racial group, and city factors. Other traits must come from query. Exit polls can directly measure the previously debated undecided group, provided the exiting voters reveal once being undecided. They can also reveal the softness of candidate support, even flip-flopping late in the game. Personally, my favorite part of watching election results on television is the reporting from exit polls. These are typically much less sophisticated than early season polls, since they tend to be more impromptu and more subject to voter lack of cooperation. The more outgoing and sociable voters cooperate. In the 1972 election, I told an exit pollster that I voted for “Captain James T Kirk” then smiled. When asked why, I said “leadership,” but revealed my real vote over my shoulder <G>. Others do not cooperate who feel an invasion of a very private constitutional right. Exit polls directly intrude into the sacrosanct voting process.
NEWS TIDBITS
A blank week for economic reports. So, nothing to distort. This is a heavy week for earnings reports though, as 40% of S&P firms and 14 of 30 Dow firms report. KMart was beaten up in a Barrons article, as they were criticized for investing little and selling portions of the business. Their stock sale was suggested based upon valuation, after a significant multi-month rise. In the same publication, Mike Santoli describes the Dow30 as stuck in an 8% range over the last 120 days, in what he calls “Dullsville.” The NYSE trading volume was 1.187 billion shares last week, compared to a 20-day average of 1.775 billion shares. Is Fed Gradualism going to undermine the stock market for months to come? The Retail Holders index (RTH) is down for five consecutive weeks. WalMart reports that sales remain in the 2 to 4% growth range, but cites $16 billion in tax refunds one year ago which make for tough comparisons. The Fed Funds futures contract is pricing in a 25% chance of a 25 basis point rate hike in August. Greenspan faces Congress in the next two days for Humphrey Hawkins testimony. One side will make speeches disguised as questions, while the other will make eloquent excuses. Attorney Spitzer filed a motion to put the NYSE Grasso case into state court.
http://www.financialsense.com/Market/wrapup.htm