Chuck Todd: I admit that we could be substantially underpolling Dems in VA and OH

[grantcart]

He acknowledged that there were hundreds of thousands of new Democratic voters being registered, especially in these two states (what he doesn't know in others we will keep to ourselves).


How can pollsters poll voters that never voted before? They can't and that isn't a conspiracy it just is reality.

[spanone]

1. cellphones.....i predict that the polling will be shown to be extraordinarily outdated

[grantcart]

5. its not just cell phones but voters who never voted before.

[Captain Hilts]

8. Cellular phones are no longer limited to specific segments of the population....

so the distortion isn't as great as, say, eight years ago when it made it more difficult to reach younger people, specifically men.

[crazylikafox]

22. everybody's got a cell phone, but I don't know anybody under 30 with a landline

Well, maybe under 25.

[Captain Hilts]

25. It depends on where you live. Under 30 are traditionally the most difficult to get on the phone...

particularly men. For this reason a lot of pollsters start their surveys with "may we speak to the youngest male voter registered to vote at this address?"

The numbers probably haven't changed a great deal since 2006, so they have a model to work from in balancing the demographics.

[nolabels]

34. Hehe, i don't know anybody over 30 that doesn't have a P.C.

The pollsters may or may not be able to debate if they have valid point. Truthfully though, seeing how grossly they missed the last call on the mid-term congressional elections i would say they are packing a pant-load too :-)

[Neecy]

2. but then he went on to add

Because, after all, he has to be 'fair and balanced' that McCain could have an advantage in MI/WI because, essentially, white racists there will vote a straight Dem ticket except for Obama because he's black.

I can't believe this guy is paid to spout such shit...

[sandnsea]

3. They can get the list from the county

Just like campaigns do. They won't.

[grantcart]

10. But from their established methodology you cannot give the same weight

to a person who has never voted before and somebody that has registered and voted in the last 4 elections.

I agree that they could make some adjustment in party weighting but what is happening is so without precedent that they are rightly constrained in what values to add to these newly registered voters.

[sandnsea]

14. They can poll All Americans

So at least voters know what ALL Americans are thinking. If they did that, they know all those non-voters would figure out why things are screwed up and go "oooohh, maybe I should vote".

[grantcart]

21. no they can't poll large numbers and they never had

the whole point of polling is to poll a representative number. The problem with the demographics changing so radically with the Obama campaign adding upwards to 10 million new voters that they are unable to get a guage on the new demographics.

We have known this for some time. Now the media is acknowledging it.

It is neither a ground breaking find or particularly surprising point. It is noteworthy that the pundits are starting to put an asterisk next to their projections.

[sandnsea]

23. Yes. A representative number of ALL Americans

Not just registered voters or likely voters. ALL Americans.

And yes they CAN get a handle on the new demographics. How do you think the campaigns are going to do GOTV if they don't identify the new voters? The pollsters WON'T do it, it's not that they can't.

[Boz]

16. The pollseters have to pay for lists and dont, buy limited updates, just mains

So they dont pick up new incrementals

[sandnsea]

17. Why are you making excuses for shitty polling? n/t

[Boz]

29. Just the opposite, Im saying thats why they dont get new voters,and I have said Polls are useless

Polls are like movie reviews, they don't really move or measure people like they used to

They arent even a snapshot of voters anymore, they are just Opinion Editorials at the time, of the people they happen to catch.

People make up their own mind and listen to their circle of influence. I have watched again and again over the last few years movies get good reviews and tank and movies get bad reviews and do blockbuster box office.

There was a time a review would make or break a movie, not any more and polls are the same way.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=7064108&mesg_id=7064142

[bettyellen]

30. it's human nature to be influenced by polls. always has been. some people will do anything not to

be "associated with" losers. polls absolutely still matter when it comes to these voters.

the younger generation is no different, trust me. i see it first hand every day, and with bright educated people.

[ej510]

4. But then went on to say that Obama will lose Wisconsin and Michigan because of race.

[grantcart]

13. It will be interesting to see how MI is looking a week from now

The comment about Wisconsin is laughable. At one point they use the primaries to say that Obama will have a problem in, say PA, because of the primary results when running against Clinton. In Wisconsin he swamped her and now they have a race problem with Obama? It was a silly point and the fact that McCain and Palin are not going to WI prove the point. In a week from now MI will be solid for Obama.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

15. Said 'could' not will

[Boz]

18. MI yes but WI, is a coinflip, this election is all about CO, NV and NM, when the others slip those

are the makeup states to fill in the electoral gaps.

Obamas ground game is killer in NV almost all of California is working NV. CO is just starting to ground play and NM needs work.

[PCIntern]

6. PCIntern: I admit that Chuckie Todd is a RW Troll with Potemkin Facial Hair n/t

[alcibiades_mystery]

7. He's hedging...doesn't want to look like an idiot Novemeber 5

The Chuck Todd Dilemma: He's only relevant if the polls are close. BUT, he's only an expert if he gets it right.

So, on the on hand, he has to pretend the polls are close. Onb the other, he has to have an out if they turn out to be NOT close come November 4.

[grantcart]

11. That's exactly right - he knows that the polls are way off and he is trying

to put an asterisk on it.

[City Lights]

9. Chukie Tee admits he doesn't have a clue.

Thanks for admitting that, Chukie. Now we can ignore you.

[FrenchieCat]

32. He bought our affection during the primaries.

Now, just like Drudge, he turns on us.

Typical.....

[endthewar]

12. "likely votesr" often includes whether or not you've voted before

so that might underpoll new voters.

[BlueIdaho]

19. I hope its a blowout

So Chuckles has to admit a fucking Ouija board provides more insight than he ever can.

[MarjorieG]

20. Manipulation makes every state iffy, and only vast numbers register that BS button.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

24. I hope that there will be a huge surprise!

[formercia]

26. They keep polling the same people

as long as they give the right responses.

Even if the questions are fair, if your polling database is skewed, the data are worthless.

[madcaplaughed]

27. hoping

i think the dc community should get together and do our own unbiased, random poll. If only there was a community organizer ;)

[formercia]

28. This is a GOP town

All the Republicans I talk with feel like I do. Junior screwed the pooch and McSame is more of the same.

Those polls aren't even close.

How about voters will cell phones only who live below the radar? Lots of people in that category.

[FrenchieCat]

31. Here's the fucker on KO......

Full of shit.

[farmboxer]

33. My relatives in Ohio said that Obama was way more popular

there and I was in Richmond, VA last week and I saw lots of Obama stickers, only one McCain. It does not look that close there to me, so the corporate media must be counting on their Republican manufactured and programmed voting machines once again.

[iconicgnom]

35. Correct. The polling technique only guages likely changes in '04 voters' preferences.

And since the '04 election had only a 64% turnout (albeit high for US averages), it only gauges a cross-section of those. The '04 election result, clearly broken as it was, had the same 50/50 split as '00, which was also broken. So this polling technique is biased toward the 50/50 split characteristic of, I hate to say it, a lost generation (and yes, the elections were stolen, too). The technique itself is biased, so people who don't factor in this bias are being misled.

This technique doesn't account for realtime human factors like an "enthusiasm difference". Face it, McCain/Palin can't generate anything more than an echo of Palin's "reborn pentecostal" (ex!-catholic!) enthusiasm, and even that echo is burdened by the fact that the McCain/Palin ticket is a self-generating lie built on a foundation of lies. The McCain/Palin ticket wants to extend the life of a dishonorable regime, a dishonorable administration -- an administration that cannot face the clear light of day because it is built on lies. Lies getting the US into Iraq, yes, but also lies regarding everything it did. An administration that disgraced the USA. The only enthusiasm that the McCain/Palin ticket can generate is false. As you know, it isn't a pretty sight.

Compare that to the enthusiasm that Obama generates. It's a difference between the dead of blackest night, where the sun hasn't shined for years, and a dawning light.

Excuse me but I'm going to repeat an argument I made in another thread, re. Colin Powell's supposed admission that he was "lied to", to explain why when he spoke for the US he lied to the world from the podium of the UN. To the notion that this was in any way excupatory I said:

"Give us a break! After which, GWB was elected a 2nd time. And of course, they ALL say that they were "lied to"; there isn't one of them who doesn't, except GWB himself, the ultimate victim, who hides behind "executive privilege" (absolute immunity to legal norms) while Pelosi and Reid give him the argument, implying that yes, lies of this magnitude are "normal", and it is "normal" for this kind of lie to be implicitly exhonorated by claims to "executive privilege". As "non-partisan" an ethic, or lack of, as it gets.

Let me explain a rock-bottom fact. Any nation of people who accept as normal that their leaders lie to them, lie to the world at large, and hold no concept of honor, is a nation of slaves. Period. And that's what the US has become, your hero Colin Powell being proof of the matter."

Now, grantcart, you know what I want? What I think is identical to what you want? I want to see all the dems who've been whining about polls, and about the lying Republican abomination, get off their asses and show the enthusiasm that's NECESSARY TO WIN. That is HAPPINESS, HOPE, and a POSITIVE TRUTHFUL MESSAGE. pure and simple.

[Hamlette]

36. they poll people who have never voted before, they just don't "count" them

is/when they break it down by likely voters, ppl who have never voted before get dropped.

[cliffordu]

37. I know it's wishful thinking, but I hope we win in 45 states....

I hope we put the republicans out of business for 50 years.