Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Will exit polls be less controversial Tuesday than they were four years ago? Early voting

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ProgressiveEconomist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-02-08 07:00 PM
Original message
Will exit polls be less controversial Tuesday than they were four years ago? Early voting
Early voting prevalence and differentially fewer survey refusals by more enthusiastic Obama supporters than by less enthusiatic McCain supporters are the main concerns of the exit poll consortium this year, according to Politico.

WHAT'S YOUR OPINION?

From http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14778.html :

"Media sweats over exit poll accuracy By DAVID PAUL KUHN 10/20/08

Media outlets are preparing for the possibility that their Election Day surveys could be skewed because of overstated support for Barack Obama, largely because of the enthusiasm of his supporters. While exit polling is a notoriously inexact science--early exit poll results suggested John Kerry would be elected president in 2004--the introduction of several new variables, ranging from the zeal of Obamas supporters to his racial background to widespread early voting, is causing concerns among those charged with conducting the surveys and the networks that will be reporting them. 'Its in some ways the flip side of non-cooperation,' said one pollster involved in preparations, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, 'Its over-cooperation by certain people.'

... The exit polls are conducted by the National Election Pool (NEP), a consortium of ABC News, Associated Press, CBS News, CNN, Fox News and NBC News formed in 2003. In theory, exit polls should match election results. But for all the care that goes into conducting accurate exit polls, errant results arent completely uncommon. Respected polling analyst Mark Blumenthal found that during the Democratic primaries this year, preliminary exit polls overestimated Obama's strength in 18 of 20 states, by an average error of 7 percentage points, based on leaked early results. The reason? Obamas supporters were younger, better educated and often more enthusiastic than Hillary Clinton's, meaning they were more likely to participate in exit polls. Insurgent candidate Pat Buchanans support also was overstated in the 1992 New Hampshire Republican primary, a phenomenon attributed to the greater willingness of his impassioned supporters to participate in exit surveys.

More recently, in 2004, exit poll data that began circulating early in the afternoon led to short-lived Democratic elation and deep Republican anxiety. By evening, some of President George W. Bushs key strategists were frantic, emailing reporters at polling organizations to better understand the gap between what they were finding on their own and what the leaked exit polls indicated. As it turned out, preliminary exit polls overstated womens turnout that year. This 'programming error,' which affects the statistical method that pollsters use to match surveys to the electorates composition, was discovered by the third wave of exit polling. By then, though, the premature polls had already been leaked online. ...

One important difference between 2008 and 2004 is that the early poll results are less likely to leak. Just as in 2006, the NEP has isolated a room in New York City where analysts are closed off to communication. Accurate sampling, however, is an even greater concern. In 2004, the over-sampling of women--who are more likely to be Democrats--was not the only error. Democrats, in general, turned out to be more likely to participate in the exit poll interviews than Republicans. It also surfaced that younger interviewers, who hand out the paper questionnaire to voters, were less likely to get a response from older voters. Older voters are more likely Republican. In the end, Kerrys vote was overstated in 26 states. The same was true for Bush in four states, according to a detailed post election analysis by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International, who administer the exit poll for the NEP. To correct their methodology, Joe Lenski, executive vice-president of Edison, said the NEP has increased the average age of those conducting interviews. In 2004, that age was 34 years old. Today, the average is 42. In addition, the NEP has successfully won the right in several state courts to allow their interviewers to gain closer physical access to polling places. This allows pollsters to measure a more accurate sample. There has also been increased training of interviewers to maintain random sampling--for example, cautioning interviewers to not habitually approach the next approaching voter if one voter declines. ...

The NEP will be increasingly relying on phone polls conducted prior to Election Day to compensate for states with large portions of early voters--a technique that proved successful most recently in the Democratic primaries."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-02-08 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
1. Which exit polls? The real ones or the doctored ones?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveEconomist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-02-08 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. The "reluctant Republican voter hypothesis" has been attacked credibly, but not here
and not in your other DU thread link.

I have yet not read the Stenger sheehan Read report linked at the URL below. Have you?
Are there actual data on exit poll survey refusal rates in 2004, or only guesses?

From http://www.commondreams.org/news2005/0331-02.htm :

"The consortium that conducted the presidential exit polls, Edison/Mitofsky, issued a report in January suggesting that the discrepancy between election results and exit polls occurred because Bush voters were more reticent than Kerry voters in response to pollsters.

The authors of this newly released scientific study "Analysis of the 2004 Presidential Election Poll Discrepancies" consider this "reluctant Bush responder" hypothesis to be highly implausible, based on extensive analysis of Edison/Mitofsky's exit poll data. They conclude, "The required pattern of exit poll participation by Kerry and Bush voters to satisfy the exit poll data defies empirical experience and common sense under any assumed scenario." ...

The report concludes, "We believe that the absence of any statistically-plausible explanation for the discrepancy between Edison/Mitofsky's exit poll data and the official presidential vote tally is an unanswered question of vital national importance that needs thorough investigation."

Ph.D. statisticians in America who have seen this group's preliminary exit poll study have not refuted it. This new study is a much more comprehensive an analysis of the exit poll discrepancies. The report is available on-line:

http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/Exit_Polls_2004_Edison-Mitofsky.pdf

An executive summary of the report by is available at: http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/Exit_Polls_summary.pdf ."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveEconomist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-02-08 11:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. And Mark Blumenthal has written about a possible refutation of the "election fraud"
interpretation of the Edison/Mitovsky 2004 results.

Assuming that refusal rates would be the same across precincts may be a fatal flaw in the Stenger Sheehan Read rejection of the "reluctant Republican responder hypothesis". See http://www.mysterypollster.com/main/2005/04/the_liddle_mode.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnTheOtherHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-02-08 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
2. I'm expecting sort of like 1992 (or maybe 2006)
Considerable discrepancies, but most people won't care because they won't affect the outcome. However, the exit poll true believers (who either didn't exist in 1992, or at least weren't able to follow the exit polls on the Intertubes) will continue to truly believe -- just as some people truly believe that millions of House votes were stolen in 2006.

Given the discrepancies during the primaries, it seems wishful to suppose that the election day results will be spot on -- although anything is possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EconomicLiberal Donating Member (554 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-02-08 08:31 PM
Response to Original message
4. Initial exit poll results are always wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 08:20 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC