Fun with Polls: NBC/WSJ/Marist Complete the Cycle Without Finding Romney Leading Any State — Race OVER!

We’ve gone after this unholy alliance of polling hard over the last few weeks and not without cause. Now I blog their aggressive samplings of Democrats more out of sadness than anger.  They spent a lot of money to bolster President Obama and it seems like even these fiascos of polls are coming back to reality with closer races despite the turnout models with 0% chance of occurring on election day.

This week we have New Hampshire, Nevada and North Carolina.

New Hampshire — Obama leads by 7; 51 to 44, one vote other and 4 Undecided

Party ID is even with Dem 25, Rep  25, Ind 47.  This compares to 2008 D +2 (Dem 29, Rep 27, Ind 45) and 2004 of R +7 (Dem 25, Rep 32, Ind 44).  A shade high on Democrats since the state is probably R +2 or R +3.  But a good poll for the President.

Nevada — Obama leads by 2; 49 to 47, one vote other and 3 Undecided

Party ID is D +7 (Dem 38, Rep 31 , Ind 30) versus 2008 of D +8 (Dem 38, Rep 30, Ind 26) and 2004 of R +4 (Dem 35, Rep 39, Ind 26). Again with the repeat of the once-in-a-generation turnout from 2008 that almost certainly will not be repeated.  But with such an aggressive turnout model Obama only leads by 2?  Very bad poll for him.  I’ll turn it over from here to a guy who knows a lot more about Nevada politics and polls than me, Jon Ralston:

  • Looked at full demos for NBC/WSJ/Marist. Look good. Dems may not like, but could argue it favors them. although the Hispanic sample may be slightly high (20 percent)
  • Latinos in NBC/WSJ/Marist are 62-36 in NV for Obama. 2 percent undecided.

North Carolina I will barely mention considering it is such a Battleground Obama refuses to campaign there and they are pulling all their money out of the state.  So I’m certain this poll is accurate … not. Obama leads (of course) leads by 2 and the party ID is D +8 in a state I will bet you $1000 will be pro-Republican on election day.  Split was R +1 in 2004 and since 2008 the Democrat Party has embarrassed itself statewide the likes of which few parties have imploded. One of the states with a large missing White vote is North Carolina.  This state is not a Battleground regardless of what polling the DNC tells these news outlets.

31 Comments

  1. No Tribe
    Posted September 27, 2012 at 7:31 pm | Permalink | Reply

    lol, Nate Silver will lead the charge in flipping NC back to Obama.

    Yea, that’s a terrible poll for Obama in Nevada. The Hispanic vote will not even be close to 20% there this time. In fact, I’d bet that more Mormon’s than Hispanics vote in NV in 2012… though not with $1K.

    NH is very interesting. If you adjust the numbers to a split between ’04 and ’08, and make some assumptions, it comes out a slim 1-2% lead for Romney.

    btw, I found out that Jill Stein did not make the ballot in NH, and is a write in there. Pretty bad luck for Romney.

  2. Dan Chammas
    Posted September 27, 2012 at 7:32 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Is the argument that pollsters make sure that their sample reflects a higher Democratic turnout? They could accomplish this by weighting their responses to reflect an aniticpated higher Democractic turnout or by continuing to call people until they reach enough Democrats. Or is the argument that the pollsters are actually calling 1,000 people, and that a higher proportion of respondents consider themselves democrats? What is the accusation here? Is it that the polls unreliably (but truthfully) picked up more Democrats than Republicans, or that the poll, by design, reaches a model that includes more Democrats?

    • WillBest
      Posted September 27, 2012 at 7:55 pm | Permalink | Reply

      They typically don’t adjust by party ID. They will weight based on age and race though. I had read somewhere that they are using the 2008 demos to adjust their sample and some even adjust it for population changes since 2008 which favor minorities.

  3. margaret
    Posted September 27, 2012 at 7:38 pm | Permalink | Reply

    So that’s why Romney is in PA tomorrow! He can’t win any of the other swing states that are more winnable so he tries to get an even tougher nut to crack! /sarc

    As you mentioned, NC is off the table. Bob Beckel of the Obama campaign basically said NH was off the table last week. I think it will return to its pre-2008 state, like all of the southern states. NV is also falling into place.

    It’s shocking how the media and MSM pollsters are declaring the race over before even one debate has taken place. Shocking and sickening…

    • Posted September 27, 2012 at 10:19 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I don’t think NC is off the table for Romney. True, five of the last six polls there have Obama winning but Romney still has a chance.

      • margaret
        Posted September 27, 2012 at 10:49 pm | Permalink

        I didn’t make that clear. I totally believe NC is going for Romney, off the table for Obama. The NC absentee ballots by party are coming in strongly for republicans (assuming R vote R and D vote D).

      • Posted September 27, 2012 at 11:05 pm | Permalink

        I see. You may be right on NC, although the polls show Obama ahead. But I don’t think Obama needs NC in any case.

  4. Timothy
    Posted September 27, 2012 at 7:55 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Barack will be lucky to get 22% black voter turnout that the Marist poll is assuming in North Carolina. Here’s a neat link to track early voting in North Carolina. http://www.carolinatransparency.com/votetracker/ (It’s a safe link to Civitas, a conservative website). Quick course in NC politics: Mecklenburg County is Charlotte. Wake County is Raleigh. Guilford County is Greensboro and often lumped with Forsyth County (Winston-Salem) collectively called “The Triad” The Triad makes up for whatever Mecklenburg spews out. Buncombe County is Asheville (liberal bastion).

  5. jeff
    Posted September 27, 2012 at 7:56 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Yes its amusing how they transparently vouch for BO. I also predict that CO Will also fall into place for Romney and am also confident about VA. Rasmussen also has Romney ahead in IA.

  6. margaret
    Posted September 27, 2012 at 8:21 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Jeff, I agree with you on CO and VA. I had heard they gave up on NM. Eventually with Rep Governor Susanna Martinez, who was impressive at the RNC, that state may come around in the future.

    We’re analyzing absentee ballot returns for NC, absentee ballot requests for OH, and plummeting new Dem voter registrations in FL (with corresponding big jumps for Reps).. All three are looking like excellent indicators for Romney yet it’s like the pollsters want us to believe their manipulated polls over the real data coming in!

    Here’s something else. A Bloomberg article from July 9 2012 called “Independent voter surge cuts Democrats’ swing state edge” says: “Independent voters are growing in numbers at the expense of Democrats in battleground states most likely to determine this year’s presidential election, a Bloomberg News analysis shows.”. Independents grew by 443,000 in CO,FL,IA,NV,NH,NC since 2008. Dems dropped 480,000 and Reps added 38,000. Voters are fleeing the Democratic party. This has got to make a difference in the outcomes of the swing states.

    • jeff
      Posted September 27, 2012 at 9:01 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Margaret its going to come down to turnout. I really believe that so much is at stake that a coalition of evangelicals tea partiers and rank and file Republicans are going to come out in droves. These are people who largely stayed at home in 2008 but at the same time will stand in line to vote in a categoru 5 hurricane given whats at stake. They may not be in love with Romney but they will still turnout a la 2010 as an anti Obama protest.

      • jeff
        Posted September 27, 2012 at 9:06 pm | Permalink

        I live in Florida. Theres no where near the enthusiasm for BO as in 2008. Far fewer car stickers abd banners. Florida will go for Romney.

      • margaret
        Posted September 28, 2012 at 12:48 am | Permalink

        Did you know that new voter registrations for Dems in the last year are down DRASTICALLY and I mean to almost non-existent? These stats are from the Florida Times-Union of Jacksonville.”During the 13 months beginning July 1 the year before elections in 2004 and 2008, registered Democrats increased by an average of 209,425 voters. From 2011 to this year, that number was 11,365. Over that same time, the number of registered Republicans increased by 128,039, topping the average of 103,555 during the past two presidential cycles.”

        The paper says it’s due to strict voter id laws and purging of voter rolls. I think it’s also that Dems are not enthused and it could be taken as a measure of voter intensity (or lack). Look at the surge in new registrations for Republicans. This has got to affect turnout and the final vote total IMHO.

    • Posted September 27, 2012 at 10:21 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Who gave up in NM? Obama?

      • margaret
        Posted September 27, 2012 at 10:51 pm | Permalink

        Again, sorry I wasn’t clear. I heard Republicans pulled advertising on NM. Romney-Ryan haven’t gone there either.

      • No Tribe
        Posted September 28, 2012 at 10:04 am | Permalink

        No body has played much in NM. Koch has done about $500k in ads in Aug, and that’s it. Obama moved his staff from AZ to NM 2 months ago, Romney moved staff from NM to CO and NV– iirc the wording was that he just didn’t make the projected hires there in NM.

  7. Waingro
    Posted September 27, 2012 at 10:27 pm | Permalink | Reply

    The poll is a D+3.

    http://www.suffolk.edu/files/SUPRC/9_27_2012_tables.pdf

    • Posted September 27, 2012 at 10:43 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Thanks! I’ll get this up shortly

    • Posted September 27, 2012 at 11:06 pm | Permalink | Reply

      You guys are obsessed with the D+ and R+, huh?

      • Posted September 28, 2012 at 12:26 am | Permalink

        yeah it’s all about turnout…if we can beat the spread the polls are finding and rack up a turnout at 2004 levels which is 38% or higher (yup record numbers) the polls wont matter we will win. Basically at this point we all agree Obama is leading but honestly probably more like 2-3 which can be overcome with a massive turnout.

      • Posted September 28, 2012 at 1:16 am | Permalink

        Don’t bother, shane. Peter is just spouting the latest left-wing talking point……..that D+/R+ “doesn’t matter”, so D+12 samples are totally reasonable…..

      • Posted September 28, 2012 at 9:52 am | Permalink

        Aussie, Shane I don’t know if d+10 or R+8 is the right number. What I do know is that:

        1.party ID changes all the time and is measured differently by different pollsters so can’t be compared.
        2. There is ample historical evidence that most independents aren’t. They lean to one party or the other. So there are people that will respond they are D or R and the next election may call themselves I.
        3. The best explanation for the “skewed” samples is that a chunk of people that in the past were Rs are now calling themselves I. So all you need to do is move them from the I column to the R column and the skew goes away, but the results stay the same.

        Finally, this happens every election cycle, the losing party pretends the polls are wrong. Even the people at Redstate admit this. You guys should too.

      • Posted September 28, 2012 at 10:12 am | Permalink

        Peter,
        I get that, the party ID changes all the time. But the FACTS are regardless of whether Reps are Indp or what…many of these polls are polling %s of Dems that are at or HIGHER than the level that turned out in 2008, a banner year. So the point is if HALF of the republicans from 08 are now INDP…that still does not explain how or why a poll with 38-41% Dems in the sample size is logical. The highest turnout in 40 years in 08 produced 38% Democrats. To even think Obama will pull that many democrats is just plain ridiculous. regardless of the R or I.

        WHat is interesting is we are starting to see some more logical polls coming in at a D+3 and wha-La suddenly 6 point leads are 1-3 point leads. It does matter whether you agree or not. It is basic statistics. If your sample contains more than the known value of the subject then that is a polll in error.

      • Posted September 28, 2012 at 10:27 am | Permalink

        Shane, do you really truly think that professional pollsters have never considered this?

        You all are overcomplicating this. Forget about any one poll. They are all wrong sooner or later. Just look at the poll averages. They have a great record.

      • jeff
        Posted September 28, 2012 at 11:08 am | Permalink

        Sorry Peter bit the historical facts bear me out. Not saying Romney is a guaranteed shoe in but BO has a steep hill to climb to overcome historical precedent and I think his campaign knows it in spite of the fake polls be spewed out by the MSM.

      • Posted September 28, 2012 at 11:16 am | Permalink

        Sorry Jeff, you just made that up. In fact as 538 has found out, in 18 of the last 19 presidential elections the guy who was ahead at this point in the polls went on to win the presidency.

        http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/24/the-statistical-state-of-the-presidential-race/

      • Posted September 28, 2012 at 11:19 am | Permalink

        to be clear, went on to win the popular vote. In one case (2000) winning the popular vote was not enough.

  8. Ron
    Posted September 28, 2012 at 1:43 am | Permalink | Reply

    Don’t feed the troll. Makes him hungry and condescending.

    • No Tribe
      Posted September 28, 2012 at 10:06 am | Permalink | Reply

      yea, Peter has an electoral experience in 2004 when he was wishing against the polls, and so now knows exactly what 2012 looks like from the inside out…

      • jeff
        Posted September 28, 2012 at 10:40 am | Permalink

        AVERAGE OUT GALLUP AND RAMUSSEN AND BO IS. AHEAD ABOUT 2-3 POINTS AS OF TODAY. NOT A GOOD PLACE TO BE FOR AN IMCUMBANT. IN FACT NO INCUMBANT HAS WON AT THIS STAGE OF THE ELECTION WITH A 4 POINT OR LESS GAP IN THE POLLS.

      • Posted September 28, 2012 at 10:51 am | Permalink

        jeff, not a good idea to make stuff up. Using all caps won’t help create a new reality.

One Trackback

  1. […] You can read my previous take-downs of the least reliable poling outfitl this cycle here, here and […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: