A full-service media consulting business • Multi-media campaigns, including internet • Freelance news reporting service • Political Commentary and Analysis • Voice-over talent, audio narration services, commercial voices • Public relations campaigns • Crisis communications consultants • Polling • Media training for business and executives • Press Release and News Conference preparation

Explaining the Volatility of Polling

Vote Here Sign.jpg

(Danville, California)

An Associated Press-GfK poll this week raised a lot of eyebrows when it showed the Presidential race at Obama 44 percent to 43 percent McCain. “How can that be?” many pondered, since so many other polls had Obama with a much bigger lead, upwards of ten points or more.

As some of my readers know, I am currently working on my Doctorate in Education Leadership at St. Mary’s College of California. A big focus has been on learning how to conduct quantitative and qualitative research, including surveys and polling.

One thing I’ve learned is that no two polls are alike. A lot depends on what questions you ask and on how you ask them. Other factors include how the sample of respondents is chosen.

I raise these issues because of polling discrepancies in the Presidential race, as well as some others. The Minnesota Senate race is a good case in point. With longtime “Saturday Night Live” comedian Al Franken running as a Democrat, it is probably the most talked about statewide race since Arnold Schwarzenegger became Governor of California. Celebrity attracts attention, and attention drives polling. In Minnesota, it’s been all over the map. Complicating matters is independent candidate Dean Barkley, who is consistently polling 15 to 19 percent.

A poll out today from St. Cloud State University has Republican incumbent Senator Norm Coleman up by nine points. But a “Big Ten Battleground” poll taken this past Friday has Franken leading by six points. A Rasmussen poll on Thursday has Franken ahead by four points, but a Survey USA poll from Monday has Coleman ahead by two points.

As I said, the polling is all over the place. Why? Let’s examine a few answers.

“Margin of error” – Look for this in any poll. It’s usually plus or minus 3 to 5 points. Let’s say a poll shows Franken 46 percent to Coleman 42 percent, with a margin of error of 4 points. At its widest, that means Franken could be ahead 50 to 38 percent or, at its closest, that Coleman is actually ahead 46 to 42 percent, given the four-point margin of error.

What questions are asked? – This is crucial. Some polls simply ask: “If the election was held today, for whom would you vote, Al Franken or Norm Coleman.” But if you add information such as “Democrat Al Franken or Republican Norm Coleman,” now you have introduced a potential bias based on political party. The better polls focus on what they call “likely” voters. For example, a person might be asked qualifying questions such as “Are you registered to vote?” and “Did you vote in the last Presidential race?” The idea is to narrow the poll to people who are actually planning to vote, rather than just having people express their candidate preference. With traditionally low voter turnout in the United States, this “narrowing” technique is crucial.

Who gets asked? - I’ve often heard people lament, “No one ever calls to poll me!” It’s a valid point. National surveys might make their prediction based on 1,000 responses in a country with 200 million eligible voters; but if you choose a representative cross section of the public, you can be very accurate. The problems with this are built-in biases. Polling companies often “over poll" in urban areas, leaving rural areas unrepresented. This is why Al Gore was at first declared the winner in Florida back in 2000. Exit polls were heavily skewed to urban areas. When the very rural and heavily Republican panhandle was counted, George Bush pulled ahead. Another big problem nowadays is that many homes have cell phones, but no land-line telephones. Most cell phone numbers are not listed in phone directories, so many of these people never have a chance to get polled.

So when you see a poll talked about on TV or in the newspaper, be a skeptical consumer. The three most important questions are: What is the margin or error? Who was polled? And what were people asked? Most reputable media and polling organizations will report those very issues up front. If they don’t, then doubt their results and call them to complain!

A new poll I conducted shows that 97 percent of Americans simply love the website www.MarkCurtisMedia.com. Just kidding, but check in often!

Will There Be a Female Voter Backlash?

Dems for McCain.jpg

(Moraga, California)

It’s a prospect that has been simmering for months: Angry, female voters - many of whom supported Hillary Clinton - threatening to stay home or to vote for John McCain. The question with ten days before the election is "Will they materialize in any significant way?"

At certain points throughout the summer, this sentiment was growing. One poll had 27 percent of female Clinton supporters either planning to refuse voting or to cast their ballots for the GOP. Suspense only heightened when Sarah Palin was named to the Republican ticket.

Being out on the campaign trail, I never sensed that the backlash could be as high as 27 percent. But I did think 10 to 15 percent was plausible and enough to swing the election. I kept in touch with groups such as www.hireheels.com and its leader Diane Montouvalos, whom I met at Hillary Clinton’s Pennsylvania victory rally.

Well now comes another group: www.justsaynodeal.com. Actually, it was formed in June but I just got a new email update from them the other day. Here is part of what it said:

“A group of Hillary’s most ardent supporters formed a coalition called "Just Say No Deal." What followed was a viral explosion which grew organically and virtually. We put our families, jobs, reputations and even, in some cases, our lives and safety on the line to stand up and speak out in the media against the corruption of the DNC and the thuggery of the Obama campaign and ACORN. The abuse inflicted upon Hillary supporters on the blogosphere and on the trail is now being felt by McCain supporters. And, as a female candidate, Sarah Palin is now getting a taste of what ‘Our Gal’ went through.”

Remember, this is not the Republican Party lashing out here. In many respects these are liberal-to-moderate women. Why would they side with Sarah Palin? Well, not for political ideology. But look at the big Palin story this week: The clamor over how much money was spent on her wardrobe, much like the dissection of Hillary Clinton’s pantsuit collection. Honestly, do male candidates face this scrutiny? No, and that’s why you have women shouting about a double standard in the media.

CNN’s Campbell Brown, a former colleague of mine, raised this issue in her columns and show the other day. "My Issue?" Brown said. "There is an incredible double standard here, and we are ignoring a very simple reality: Women are judged based on their appearance far far more than men. That is a statement of fact. There has been plenty written about Sarah Palin's jackets, her hair, her looks.

“Sound Familar?" she asked. "There was plenty of talk and plenty written about Hillary Clinton's looks, hair, pantsuits. Compare that to the attention given to Barack Obama's $1,500 suits or John McCain's $520 Ferragamo shoes. There is no comparison."

Point well taken. It will be interesting to see what many women do on Election Day and how it might affect the outcome! Check in often at www.MarkCurtisMedia.com.

Syndicate content