Skip to main content

Last week's Gallup generic ballot declared a 56-38 TGOP lead among likely voters, given average midterm turnout. But that Gallup poll actually shows a 41-28 TGOP lead ... with 31% undecided or unknown.

We can mimic Leonard Suskind's English punter and get stuck on a poll, or we can focus on that 31%.

More below the fold....

Get Out The Vote! (Non-Cynical Saturday)

This week Morning Feature has looked at the storytelling and science of polling. Thursday we explored the history of polling and advances made since the famously wrong "Dewey Defeats Truman" headline in 1948. Yesterday we considered how pollsters try to predict likely voters. Today we conclude by asking what polls can, and can’t, tell us.

We began the discussion Thursday with a humorous anecdote in physicist Leonard Suskind's The Black Hole War. Suskind was having lunch with mathematician Arthur Penrose at an outdoor cafe in England, and the two were watching punters push tourist boats along the river with long poles. One punter's pole got stuck in the muddy river bottom. In trying to pull it free, she pulled herself out of the boat. She was left clinging to the pole as her boat and passengers drifted on. Suskind and Penrose laughed, as did the punter, who was quickly rescued by the next tourist boat.

It's a useful metaphor for elections. The media and we activists can easily get stuck on a poll while events move on, or we let go of the polls and focus on steering the boat.

What 56-38 really means.

Last week's Gallup poll was clearly not good news for Democrats. Like other likely voter polls, it showed a sizable lead for Tea Party Republicans on the generic ballot. As we saw yesterday, Gallup's model is transparent and well-tested over the years. Most other pollsters who publish their likely voter models use a similar threshold-or-out method; only CBS/New York Times counts fractional votes for less-likely voters. Many pollsters keep their likely voter models secret, so we have no way to assess their accuracy except by comparing their final polls to election results.

Gallup uses a 7-question survey, scoring one point for each positive answer unless the respondent says he/she will not vote (automatic 0). Those who score 7 are likely voters. If there aren't enough 7s to match expected  turnout, Gallup randomly selects 6s to complete the sample. Hypothetically, if expected turnout were 38%, and 25% of the responses were 7s, and 39% of the responses were 6s, Gallup would count all of the 7s and randomly select one-third of the 6s, thus: 25% (all 7s) + 13% (one-third of 6s) = 38% (expected turnout).

Unlike some likely voter models, Gallup does not weight likely voters by party or by demographics. They do not presume more TGOPers will vote, or that fewer young and minority voters will vote. Indeed they give a slight edge to voters under age 22, as two of their survey questions involve past voting and young voters were not yet eligible. Still, past elections show Gallup's model is about as accurate as any: 73% of those who actually vote were "likely voters" (7s or 6s) by Gallup's method. By comparison, the most rigorous likely voter model I could find - proposed by academics in a journal article - was only slightly more accurate (78%).

But that means 27% of actual voters are not-likely voters. Because Gallup discards the responses of not-likely voters, that 56-38 TGOP lead applies to only 73% of the actual voters. The rest were not counted. Thus Gallup's poll actually shows a 41-29 TGOP lead ... with 31% undecided or unknown.

Reaching "not-likely" voters.

New York Times poll maven Nate Silver agrees that polls are oversold, and he uses a complex mathematical regression analysis both to rate pollsters and to estimate the correlation between polls. (No, I don't understand all of it either.) One measure Silver used to correct polls is campaign spending:

The sum of individual contributions received by each candidate as of the last F.E.C. reporting period (this variable is omitted if one or both candidates are new to the race and have yet to complete an FEC filing period).

We all know that mountains of money are being spent by and for Tea Party Republicans for this election, and that would seem to give them a big edge among the other 31%, the "not-likely" voters. But maybe not. A 2002 Journal of Politics article found that more campaign spending does not always equal more turnout, or more precisely, that each additional $X does not yield an additional Y votes. The curve looks more like this:

Money Turnout CurveThe rising blue line shows voter turnout increasing slowly for a small amount of spending, then rising sharply as the campaign spends more, but then flattening again. The reason is that purple line: voter engagement.

The voters at the left edge of that curve are highly engaged, the kind of people who'll find a candidate in an off-year runoff for dog catcher. It takes very little campaign spending to reach them, but they are the only voters a candidate reaches with only a little campaign spending. To begin reaching the mass of moderately-engaged voters - the bulge in that purple curve - the candidate needs to meet a spending threshold. The candidate's ads, signs, etc. not only reach those who actually see them. They also create "buzz" ... those who see the ads talking about the candidate with other moderately-engaged voters.

But money can only buy so much buzz, or rather, that buzz will only reach so far. Once you get into less-engaged voters more money has little effect. They watch movies or channels that don't run political ads. They ignore political discussions at work or in the neighborhood. But they're about 27% of the actual voters in a typical election.

The "not-likely voters" are most of the unknown 31% in last week's Gallup poll, and that's who your local party, candidates, and OFA want to canvass or call in the next 23 days. The polls are estimates. Money can't buy everything. Midterms come down to turnout, and that comes down to GOTV.

So knock on those doors and make those calls.


Happy Saturday!

Crossposted from Blogistan Polytechnic Institute (

Originally posted to NCrissieB on Sat Oct 09, 2010 at 04:39 AM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site