There has been a lot of talk of polls during this current presidential race, and much hand-wringing of late due to the numbers. I have often heard from conservative commentators that polls don't mean diddly when they aren't in the republicants' favor, only to hear the same folks get all hot and bothered the minute a single poll works in their favor. I don't know if it has ever been pointed out before at DK, but I would like to go over in this diary a number of reasons why this time it's different. This time the polls really don't mean squat.
I have been in lurk mode at DK lately, mostly because, as a non-U.S. citizen, I don't feel I have had much of substance to add on what can/should be done to ensure that Obama wins the White House. I have always prefered to wax philosophical in my posts and infrequent diaries on DK, as I keep coming back here because I feel that it is the thinking person's 'chat room', if you will. While I myself am not yet a U.S. citizen, I am married to one who is 31 years young, and she is voting for the first time in a presidential election; my wife is voting for Obama.
Polls are made using the same tried and true method of interviewing likely voters. But who are these 'likely voters'? Likely voters are that portion of registered voters who are most likely to actually show up at the polls on election day. Such voters 'tend to be' older, better educated, and white. But don't take it from me - let's hear it straight from a pollster's mouth:
Four years ago, according to the Census, the United States had a voting age population of 203 million, of whom an estimated 130 million were registered to vote. Of these, 105 million cast a ballot for one of the candidates for president. Thus, the vote for president was 52% of the voting age population and 80% of registered voters.
Voters are demographically distinct. As Census estimates show, voters tend to be significantly older, better educated and white[r] than non-voters. Consider age, a subject of considerable importance this year. In 2000, only 36% of citizens between the ages 18 and 24 voted compared to 50% of those between 25 and 34 and 68% of those over 35. - Mark Blumenthal
(emphasis mine)
Fifty-two percent of the voting age population. in 2000. What happened in 2000? A Democrat won; the Republicants had to steal the election to put their candidate in the White House. But the game has changed radically in the last eight years, and I don't mean just the illegal occupation of Iraq and the abandonment of New Orleans during a national disaster. The game has changed. Obama is a game-changer. By attracting thousands (millions?) of 'unlikely voters' to participate in, not merely an election, but a referendum on American politics, the Obama campaign has rendered virtually meaningless the tried and true methodology of polling. The 'soup', as George Gallup likes to say, has had some new ingredients added to it, but these ingredients have not been 'stirred in', and therefore are not being picked up by the 'spoon'.
Young people, African-Americans, and Latinos are all considered unlikely voters, yet these are precisely the sort of voters who will vote in this election for the first time ever. They will not be contacted by pollsters for the straightforward reason that they are not likely voters (white, older). Obama has changed the game.
Another game changer is communications. Demographically, younger people are less likely to be rooted, and less likely to have an actual land-line telephone, as opposed to a cellphone. According to Pew Research, 57% of Americans age 18-29 state that a cell phone is a necessity, versus 49% of all adults and only 38% of senior citizens. Most pollsters avoid calling cellphones, and cellphone-only voters are therefore another game changer. Such voters tend to be young and mobile, and often well educated and socially active, thus fitting squarely into a key demographic of the Democratic Party.
Lastly, it would be nice to be able to demonstrate a factor which I have noticed as prevalent but for which I have no clear metrics: younger people tend to avoid taking unsolicited phone calls. Gen X grew up with caller ID, and Telemarketers are rampant and widely reviled. Baby boomers grew up with rotary phones, and tend to be more willing to pick up a call from an unrecognized number and strike up a conversation with a complete stranger. Greatest Genners grew up in an age when it was still considered appropriate behavior to physically visit someone rather than call them on the telephone. These last two groups often share in the belief that it is impolite to not answer the phone when it rings - they regard it as tantamount to hiding, and therefore weakness. Younger voters are therefore again less likely to be contacted by pollsters, even if they are randomly selected from among a pool of likely voters.
In closing, I would like to emphasize that my purpose is not to get everyone here to sigh with relief, but rather to realize that this historic election is completely unpredictable. Anything could happen, and the republicants are working very hard to ensure that their own group of unlikely voters make it to the polls on election day!