Watch Out for Phony Early Vote Numbers in Ohio

The stories that ~20% of Ohio voters have already cast votes has been floating around the blogosphere and twitterverse ever since the completely biased NBC/WSJ/Marist poll of Ohio last week.  I dismissed this as a noteworthy story to debunk because the statistic was so obviously false I didn’t think it even warranted mentioning.  To me it was just another stupid anomaly in an obviously biased poll.  But this grossly false statistic is showing up in otherwise credible news stories.  Today alone the LA Times ran a story on the battle for Ohio when I ran across this passage arguing for Obama strength in the state:

To counter the expected Republican advantage on the air, Obama will rely on his formidable get-out-the-vote operation, based in 120 offices in every part of the state. Already, just over a week into early voting here, that has begun paying off. The early vote so far comes to nearly a fifth of the likely turnout, election officials estimate, and so far has been disproportionately from areas that went for Obama in 2008. (An NBC/Wall Street Journal/Marist poll released Thursday showed that 18% of likely voters said they already had cast ballots and 63% supported Obama.)

This is 100% false.

Sarah Hoyt guest blogging on Instapundit today, directs readers to a post on Ace of Spades shedding light on that patently false figure — it is part and parcel of the campaign to demoralize GOP voters since a low turnout is Obama’s only path to victory:

OPERATION DEMORALIZE CONTINUES: Pollsters: 1/5 of Ohio Vote Already In! Me: Bull by CAC over at Ace Of Spades Headquarters.

CAC’s bone of contention is this statistic is showing up in a PPP poll. For any new readers I don’t blog PPP polls because they are openly biased and not credible. Today’s takedown at Ace of Spades is only the latest instance:

[According to PPP’s poll in Ohio] 19% of respondents have already voted and they are breaking 3-1 Obama. That seems to spell certain doom for Romney.

CAC then points out 3 red flags in PPP’s figure basically noting that in the most populous county that also leans heavily Democrat, the early vote total is under 5%.  This makes it mathematically implausible  Team Obama is over-performing elsewhere across the state enough to push the aggregate % to 19% or 20%. But that is just absentee ballots so CAC goes straight to the Secretary of State who only a few days ago released early in-person where we find that “59,353 Ohioans have already cast an absentee ballot in person.” Based on these figures CAC concludes the statistic is wrong and anyone using the stat “is either ignorant of the actual statistical numbers reported or they are deliberately pushing a very, very steamy pile.”

But instead of extrapolating from one county across the state, let’s do the math ourselves with actual figures since the press refuses to do their homework:0

For Ohio’s actual figures we’ll use the US Elections Project at George Mason University which is updated through today (October 14). Note: Ohio’s #s are kept up by our own blog-friend ningrim:

  • 256,915 absentee votes cast absentee thus far
  • 59,353 have cast in-person votes according to the Secretary of State
  • This totals 316,268 votes cast
  • The aggregate vote total for Ohio in 2008 was 5,721,374
  • 316, 268 divided by 5,721,374 equals 0.055 or 5.5%

Therefore the laws of mathematics say 5.5% of votes have been cast in Ohio  using early voting simply based on the 2008 turnout. The percentage goes lower if we assume a rejuvenated GOP or increased turnout from Team Obama micro-targeting.

This is far, far, far from the 19% or 20% figure being bandied about by PPP, NBC, the Wall Street Journal and LA Times among others.

We blogged about this “project demoralizephenomenon before but it is clear the media lackeys for the Obama campaign will create and parrot any false story they can to improve Obama’s chances and keep Romney voters home.

13 Comments

  1. William Jefferson Jr.
    Posted October 14, 2012 at 3:36 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I’m disappointed the WSJ has participated in NBC’s propaganda this election. Partnering with Marist was a huge red flag. Marist’s final poll in 2004 had Kerry up +1. That’s all you need to know about these folks.

  2. M.Remmerde
    Posted October 14, 2012 at 3:53 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Ah, c’mon Keith. Who ya gonna believe? Actual, real, factual, directly counted numbers from the OH Secretary of State? Or the *science* of polls? You’re not one of them science deniers, are ya? 😉

    • Posted October 14, 2012 at 3:56 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Plenty of Democrats are going to angrily argue your exact point on November 7. “But the polls all told me Obama was guaranteed to win!”

  3. jvnvch
    Posted October 14, 2012 at 4:03 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I’ve been following presidential election polling intently since 1980, and the polling and news stories about the polling is the worst I’ve seen. It’s been really disgraceful this year. It’s been easy to see through it all, if you really understand what’s going on, but most people don’t understand, unfortunately.

    Romney will win Ohio, and the election, despite the best efforts of the left, which includes most journalists, and many pollsters, to defeat him.

  4. Pete
    Posted October 14, 2012 at 4:10 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Dems are desperate. Biden flopped. Benghazi has the admin imploding. VA FL CO now seen going Red Poll in NV has Romney in lead. Crowds huge in OH. Ras and Gallup have O stuck @ 47%. O’s hiding at home rather than campaigning in the last few weeks. Now resorting to false voting reports.

    Internals must spell doom.

  5. No Tribe
    Posted October 14, 2012 at 4:16 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Do these idiots at the PPP, NBC, the Wall Street Journal and LA Times not know there is an internet that makes them look like complete fools?

    Tom Jenson, raise your hand.

  6. No Tribe
    Posted October 14, 2012 at 4:23 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I’ve been following the Ohio numbers here on this spreadsheet:
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvEOdIaw0fPNdHVOZnFENDdDYVFTRi1UMlgxQ0F4OVE#gid=0

    Everyday, it gets a bit tighter in favor of Republicans. Last cycle’s 14.02% this cycle, 6.42%

    Now, caveat’s aside, this shows clear statistical movement.

  7. Tim
    Posted October 14, 2012 at 4:30 pm | Permalink | Reply

    It seems like the election rests on Ohio again. Any thoughs on status on race in this state? Anything to support your analysis?

  8. Tim
    Posted October 14, 2012 at 4:33 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Any thought on expected outcome of debate? Obama will likely do mildly better and Romney may not hit a home run and should hold his own. Do polls swing back to Obama a bit even if its a draw?

  9. MikeP
    Posted October 14, 2012 at 5:25 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Ohio is important no doubt,
    but not mandatory if Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin or Iowa break for Mitt Romney. Out of these Iowa has the best chance going Red ( both historically and probably in the polls). Rasmussen has Iowa slightly, but constantly in Mitt Romney column. I’m wondering where the lastest Iowa polls have been (the last poll was 10/7/2012 by Rasmussen which showed Mitt Romney in the Margin of error).

  10. mdr1972
    Posted October 14, 2012 at 6:32 pm | Permalink | Reply

    i hear Obama is going to bring up Bain and Mitt’s tax returns at the next debate. For once, why doesn’t Mitt ask Obama to release his college records? Obama has sealed or fought the release of every single record pertaining to him. This is going to get real nasty.

    • Medicine Man
      Posted October 14, 2012 at 7:02 pm | Permalink | Reply

      He may try. These will be questions from the crowd. If he tries to work those topics in and it doesn’t flow, it will look desperate.

  11. Shauna
    Posted October 14, 2012 at 7:29 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Thank you… I think the interest in this poll was due to the tease… and CAC did that yesterday… I personally thought it would show Mitt ahead… so it was very disappointing to see another blatant lie… but CAC didn’t do as good of a job with his numbers… I got it sort of… but seeing the elections project numbers make it crystal clear!!! Also, RCP is using it and the marist poll to average Ohio at O up 1.7%. I didn’t see the number’s that Marist said had voted… but it is the same game. Why does RCP use them?

9 Trackbacks

  1. […] to the re-election efforts of Barack Obama through unrealistic polling that doubles as press releases for Obama For America and moderators who stifle Republican candidates while actively assisting the Democrats. Share […]

  2. […] the challenger.  Like I said this poll is horrible for the incumbent. And remember, watch out for phony Ohio early voting numbers: In an election for President of the United States in Ohio today, 10/16/12, Barack Obama edges Mitt […]

  3. […] Marist/NBC News/Wall Street Journal polling partnership, has been the object of some of the harshest criticism for its early voting estimates. One reason may be that they ask a simple, yes/no question […]

  4. […] Marist/NBC News/Wall Street Journal polling partnership, has been the object of some of the harshest criticism for its early voting estimates. One reason may be that they ask a simple, yes/no question […]

  5. […] Marist/NBC News/Wall Street Journal polling partnership, has been the object of some of the harshest criticism for its early voting estimates. One reason may be that they ask a simple, yes/no question […]

  6. […] Marist/NBC News/Wall Street Journal polling partnership, has been the object of some of the harshest criticism for its early voting estimates. One reason may be that they ask a simple, yes/no question […]

  7. […] Marist/NBC News/Wall Street Journal polling partnership, has been the object of some of the harshest criticism for its early voting estimates. One reason may be that they ask a simple, yes/no question […]

  8. […] Marist/NBC News/Wall Street Journal polling partnership, has been a intent of some of a harshest criticism for a early voting estimates. One reason competence be that they ask a simple, yes/no […]

  9. […] Marist/NBC News/Wall Street Journal polling partnership, has been the object of some of the harshest criticism for its early voting estimates. One reason may be that they ask a simple, yes/no question […]

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: