The Numbers
A Run at the Latest Data from ABC's Poobah of Polling, Gary Langer
Gary Langer is director of polling at ABC News, where he's covered the beat of public opinion for nearly 20 years - conducting and analyzing ABC News polls, evaluating data from other sources and setting the news division's standards for poll reporting. Langer is a two-time Emmy award winner, both for ABC's reporting of public opinion polls in Iraq.
ARCHIVES
FAVORITES
RECENT POSTS
- Groves Nomination: On the Move?
- Sarah Palin: Up Among Republicans?
- In Iraq, Progress - and Problems
- Mark Sanford and the Affairs of State
- Iran's Election: The Odds of Fraud
- Affirmative Action: Words Matter
- Hold on Groves: Mystery Hour at the Senate
- "Medical Bankruptcies:" a Data Update
- Obama and the Muslim World
- What We Don't Know About China
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
In Iowa, Somebody's Wrong
January 03, 2008 1:41 PM
Looking at the final Iowa pre-election polls released the past week, one thing is clear: Some of ’em will have the wrong order of finish.
In the Democratic race, four estimates have Hillary Clinton numerically ahead (albeit by as little as a single point), three Barack Obama, two John Edwards and one tie. They differ on second and third place, as well. And in the Republican race, five of the final-week polls have Mike Huckabee numerically ahead, three, Mitt Romney.
“Numerically ahead” means quite a few of these “leads” are within sampling error. Still, the races aren’t necessarily close. Some of these polls have it close, others not. “Close” is more of a shorthand way of saying it’s unsettled, and that given their limitations in this kind of low-turnout contest, polls can’t give us a really clear prediction of the outcomes.
While this level of inconsistency is unusual, differences are not unheard of. In the 2004 Democratic caucuses, of the five final-week poll estimates, four got Kerry correctly as winner, but one did not. Two others got second place wrong. Moreover, a lot of them were way off on the candidates’ actual support levels. Four of these five had Kerry between 21 and 26 percent support; he actually got 35 percent.
Similarly, while the final polls in the 2000 Republican caucus got the order of finish (Bush-Forbes) right, they all understated Steve Forbes, putting his support at 12 to 25 percent; he got 30. One overstated Bush by a whopping 14 points.
It doesn’t end in Iowa. In past years nearly all New Hampshire polls have gotten the right winner, but in some races have badly misstated actual support levels. It’s a reminder that pre-primary polls are best used to identify the key issues and candidate attributes and to identify the leading players, rather than to precisely handicap the final outcome.
One of these Iowa polls may well be dead-on, and the pollster who produced it likely will claim uncanny skill. Our recommendation: Don’t buy it.
January 3, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (2)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
this is an early salvo to try and deflate the fact that Hillary has gigantic leads in the biggest states - most over 20pts - so that this way, perhaps, we can have people doubt them and rush forward to try and change things under false realities.
This fairy tale is a consistent dodging of the facts, stories, and beliefs.
No specifics. No details. Misrepresent every negative as an attack. Redirect attention away from the truth. Say everybody is a liar or is too dense to see the facts. Jab. Dip. Duck. Whatever it takes to not answer. Afterall, you know who missed tons of votes because he was too busy campaigning, which proves who is the candidate most desperate for power. The one that can't take time out to do his job and go vote is the one who's ambition and ego is the driving force.
PS, this is an old new story that has suddenly resurfaced, and, why? Because the polls are unanimous and even worse for the All Obama All The Time crew is that 25% of voters voted long ago - when Hillary was definitely way ahead before the MLK twisting drove the black vote through the roof.
And now we have a Tsunami Tuesday that is going to drive that vote right back to reality.
Posted by: 2009 Where Are You? | Jan 31, 2008 4:08:35 PM
RECESSION? "The Sky is Falling!" cried Chicken Little.
All at once, right after New Years, the TV media started crying
“ Recession! Recession!” Day after day all the “anchors” shout it.
Then, the newspapers, sparked by TV and the New York Times, joined in the
drum beating and outcry, “Recession, Recession, the sky is falling!”
Where did that unified chorus originate? Who started it, and why?
Where is your memory?
Sixteen years ago, when the "Slick Willie" campaign for the Presidency started,
a cry went up from his campaign "It's the Economy, stupid!"
Remember that? "We are in a recession" "It's the Economy, stupid!"
Day after day it was “It’s the economy, Stupid!”
As soon as “Stupid” elected “Slick Willie“, there was no longer a "recession".
The economy was O.K. "Stupid" had elected "Slick Willie", thanks to
the trumped - up fears of a recession and thanks to Ross Perot who spoiled the
chances of George Bush Sr.
The hoax had worked!
Today, "Slick Willie" has his wife running for the Presidency so that he can again
be in power, It looks like she may be in trouble, so it is once more time to roll
out the “Recession” Hoax!
There is no recession, our country has never seen a time of greater prosperity.
Department of Labor data (2007)says the following "Total non-farm payroll
employment was essentially unchanged in December following gains in
October and November. In 2007 payroll employment rose by 1.3 million."
Of course there are some seasonal temporary employment changes every
December when new hires are postponed by many small companies until
after the holidays to avoid the several paid holidays. Also, many retail stores
terminate temporary employees who are hired each holiday season for
the "Christmas Rush" in sales.
The so-called "Real estate bubble burst" was only a normal decline in the
building and sales of new homes as the market reached it's saturation point.
As the demand for new homes declines, the price for them will also decline,
and many more sales will then take place. Those are normal fluctuations of
the market due to supply and demand.
Do not worry, as soon as the 2008 elections are over in November, there
will be no more cries of "Recession, Recession!". The usefulness of the
hoax will have passed.
Also, do not forget that Clinton loves a “Crises”.
16 years ago it was the “Healthcare Crises”. Today, “Mortgage Crises”.
Posted by: Lucas James | Feb 18, 2008 12:27:53 PM
Post a comment
