Too Early To Obsess Over Horserace Polls?

Kathy Frankovic: We Need To Be Careful In What We Expect From Voters In The Summer

(CBS)  This column was written by CBS News director of surveys Kathy Frankovic.

---

The question of which presidential candidate is ahead - the poll question that surveys “the horserace” - is hard to answer sometimes, but especially in the summer, when voters typically have other things to think about. But there has been such an intense focus on the horserace this summer that it has spawned some humorous but true criticisms of (what else?) the intense focus on the horserace.

One comes from Arianna Huffington who suggests a strategy for coping with the myriad of surveys; and that is: focus on just one. According to her Huffington Post blog, ”Media insiders now talk about polling brands the way average Joes talk about their favorite beer. ‘My producer is a Quinnipiac person, but I'm more into Gallup.’ I suppose if they married,” Huffington writes, “they'd have to raise the kids CBS/New York Times.” For her, there are “freshly baked daily polls,” just as there are “freshly baked daily baguettes” in France.

A New Yorker Shouts and Murmers essay by Bruce McCall parodies the subject by posing questions that no one can answer, because they are too complex or make no sense, by polling organizations that parody polling partnerships. As he writes: “A CBS/Pravda/Farmer’s Almanac/Avatar: The Last Airbender” poll released today indicates that yesterday never happened for seventy-two per cent of all respondents, but, if it had, thirty-two per cent more Independents believe now than just last May that Barack Obama and John McCain are both leading in a race now too lopsided to call.”

McCall and Huffington do, however, make a valid point: This is the wrong time of year to obsess about polls. Especially horserace polls.

The Gallup Daily tracking poll has gone from a nine-point Obama lead to a one point McCain lead, back to Obama ahead by four, and now by three points. Other polls show somewhat different patterns - or none at all. The latest CBS News poll, conducted July 31-August 5, has a 45 percent to 39 percent lead for Barack Obama among registered voters. The previous CBS News/New York Times Poll, conducted three weeks beforehand (July 7-14) was taken before Obama’s trip to Iraq, the Middle East and Europe and before the most recent set of advertising and attacks between Obama and presumptive Republican nominee John McCain. Yet that poll had exactly the same results as this week’s poll.

In fact, the poll that CBS News conducted just as Obama clinched the Democratic nomination, in early June, showed a very similar result, too. Obama led McCain 48 percent to 42 percent among registered voters, another 6-point lead, although in that poll, the percentage of undecided voters was actually half the size it became in July and early August.

Okay, it’s summertime. Even though we have seen record levels of participation and of interest in this election in most polls, voters may be doing other things in July and August. And that’s particularly the case for those who fall into the much-discussed categories of “undecided” or “uncommitted” voters - those who are either undecided between Obama and McCain, or who say their minds could still change. It’s a big group - 13 percent of registered voters in the last CBS News poll were undecided, and about three in ten of those with a choice said their minds could still change, figures that are much higher than comparable responses four years ago.

These voters are looking for more information: for example, about half of undecided voters say that the choice of a vice presidential candidate will have a great deal of influence on their vote, compared with 30 percent of voters overall.

As part of its latest poll, CBS News re-interviewed 331 people who fell into the “uncommitted” category in the July poll. Most of them remain “uncommitted.” And while nearly half of those who had been completely undecided in July now give a candidate’s name when they are asked who they will vote for in the fall, two in three of them admit they could change again. And many of them can’t articulate a specific reason for their current support.

One reason why few people’s positions shifted in the last few weeks is that relatively few of these “uncommitted” voters had been paying close attention recently. When asked how much attention they had been paying to the campaign “in the last few weeks,” only 18 percent said they had been paying a lot of attention. And these were not inattentive people: nearly half (45 percent) had said in the first interview that they had been paying “a lot” of attention to the campaign in general. But that question (“How much attention have you been able to pay to the 2008 presidential campaign - a lot, some, not much, or no attention so far?”) is about the campaign overall. Voters could have paid a lot of attention during the primaries, but not necessarily in recent weeks.

We re-interviewed only previously “uncommitted” voters. Given that the overall level of non-commitment hasn’t changed, there are certainly other voters who have become less committed or completely undecided in the last few weeks.

We need to be careful in what we expect from voters now, before the vice presidential choices are made and the convention addresses are given. We can be funny or serious, but the point is the same: Chill!

[usais11]

Stop pretending that racism does not exist or that it is just a distraction- grow up- It exists, it always will- in fact- it will be more of a problem if a black man is elected. The Democrats are desperate people who act like they are looking for a prom dates when the event was over years ago. Obama is the next BUSH- Lie,lie lie- Haven''''t you learned anything about people??!!

[laurelblosso]

The damage of haste....

[acarponzo]

Here is an up to the seconds new poll worth watching! It is instant political stress relief!

Date line Cyberspace 8/10/08 6:49 am EST

BAM BAM OBAMA 45,298 vs BIG MAC McCAIN 67,399

"Paris Effect" still being studied by both campaigns.

McCain''s http://www.BOP-O-METER.com tops 67,000 BOPS!
Obama''s http://www.BOP-O-METER.com tops 45,000 BOPS!

After a furious BOP FEST that went into the wee hours of Sunday morning, Obama jumps out with the fewest BOPS to close out the first full week at http://www.BOP-O-RAMA.com.

This reporter has not seen the like of this contest since "The Rumble in the Jungle," the great heavyweight fight between George Forman and Muhammad Ali. This with the Olympic''s is making for a rip roaring political season just before the big shows at the conventions.

Who will do a better job mobilizing there base in this instantly updated BOP POLL? Clearly the grass roots effect is working for the Obama campaign.

And what if any are these frenzied results of the first week part of the ever growing "PINK EFFECT!" The result of what is looking like a strong possible third party run by Paris!!!!!!

Well this reporter is signing off to get a cup of morning joe! If yesterday was any indication, this Sunday, August 10, 2008, could prove to be a BOPPING long day!

"Bop early and Bop often." --Alphonso Carponzo
[e-mail]

The Bops are on at http://www.BOP-O-RAMA.com

[mrtutto]

John McCain is ahead in a new poll. He beats Obama 71 to 47 when it comes to age, but loses in IQ 125 to 71.
Is it coincidence that McCain''s IQ is the same as his age ?

[mrtutto]

Oh liberty... liberty_1776, your ignorance is showing through.

[mrtutto]

The Republicans take your taxes and spend like drunken sailors.

[liberty_1776]

The easiest, cheapest way to obtain timely poll data is by telephone. And who do you think the political pollsters call? Do they call people at work? No. Do they call people at home? Yes. If you wanted to talk to working Americans (the people most likely to vote), when must you call the overwhelming majority of them? At night, between 6pm and 9pm (latest time by law in most states). Do Americans who just got home from working all day want to participate in a 15 minute political phone poll? NO. Who has the time and energy to participate in political phone polls at any time of the day or night? Unemployed bums and college kids (the people least likely to vote). These polls are so skewed toward Obama, the real margin of error is about 30% - so, just add 30% to McCain for the real numbers.

[theburg72]

The Clintons will support him,
The Media will adore him.
The stadium will be filled,
The Dems will be thrilled.
But when the people choose,
I assure you he will loose.

[demwatcher]

CORRECTION: July 2007 should have been July 2008.

Some posters here want us to feel good that oil has "gone down" to $114/barrel and gasoline is now "only" $3.80/gal?

Gas was $1.20/gal when Cowboy George took office. I guess energy prices only tripling in eight years is doing a "good job" for Republicans.

Posted by mydogdylan6 at 10:06 AM : Aug 09, 2008

Here is an education for you:

Congress makes policy and has the greatest effect on the economy.

Gas was $1.47 in January 2001 When Bush took office.
Gas was $2.18 in January 2007 when the Dems took over Congress.
Gas was $4.14 in July 2008. -

When Bush and the Republicans controlled Congress, gas went up $0.51 in six years, or less than $0.01 a month.

When the Dems controlled Congress, gas went up $1.96 in 18 months, or over $0.10 a month.

See the trend? Dems = higher gas prices.

You are now educated.

[demwatcher]

Some posters here want us to feel good that oil has "gone down" to $114/barrel and gasoline is now "only" $3.80/gal?

Gas was $1.20/gal when Cowboy George took office. I guess energy prices only tripling in eight years is doing a "good job" for Republicans.

Posted by mydogdylan6 at 10:06 AM : Aug 09, 2008

Here is an education for you:

Congress makes policy and has the greatest effect on the economy.

Gas was $1.47 in January 2001 When Bush took office.
Gas was $2.18 in January 2007 when the Dems took over Congress.
Gas was $4.14 in July 2007.

When Bush and the Republicans controlled Congress, gas went up $0.51 in six years, or less than $0.01 a month.

When the Dems controlled Congress, gas went up $1.96 in 18 months, or over $0.10 a month.

See the trend? Dems = higher gas prices.

You are now educated.

[mydogdylan6]

Some posters here want us to feel good that oil has "gone down" to $114/barrel and gasoline is now "only" $3.80/gal?

Gas was $1.20/gal when Cowboy George took office. I guess energy prices only tripling in eight years is doing a "good job" for Republicans.

[bigwhtpony]

Hilarious....McCain in a statistical tie with Ubama, and now, all of a sudden, we are asked if it''s too early to read too much in to polling.

THe LAMEstream media in the tank for democrats. Any wonder why they are losing money and viewers?

[tawpdawg111]

July 24th, 2008

H. Res. 6578, the Consumer Energy Supply Act of 2008. The measure received strong majority support in a House vote today of 268 to 157, but failed to receive the two-thirds necessary to pass under suspension of the rules. All Democrats present voted for the measure, while 157 Republicans voted against it. The measure would direct the release of a small amount of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, bringing down gas prices and sending a strong message to energy speculators.

"The American people have paid for more than 700 million barrels of oil to be held in this government stockpile. At significant taxpayer expense, the SPR is currently 97 percent full - its highest level ever.

You can see the names of the 157 Republicans who voted to keep the price of gas high at this link:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2008-527&sort=vote

Send your contributions to their opponents as soon as possible!

[liberty_1776]

How many conservative participants did the Democrat pollsters hang up on?

[wogerwabbit]

Posted by jtyler271 at 10:21 PM : Aug 08, 2008

I''m not a subsciber to the Bush is the Devil wing of the party (in fact, I''m an independant... ex-Republican), but I saw what are said to be pictures of the fan blade remains of one of the jet of the 767(?) that hit the Pentagon laying in the rubble and, if what I saw wasn''t a finely crafted photoshop redition of the scene, it definitly was a fan blade of a cruise missle. How curious.

[jtyler271]

But the facts suggest that statement is not exactly true.

Posted by usais11 at 12:55 PM : Aug 08, 2008

Funny thing about this, facts suggest that the WTC towers came down due to controlled demolition. Facts suggest that there was no plane found at the Pentagon or the Pennsylvania field. Facts suggest that the government had a hand in 9/11.

[wogerwabbit]

Posted by usais11 at 04:57 PM : Aug 08, 2008

go back to your cave... pinhead

[usais11]

With all due respect, if a black man were to win the Presidency, whites would lose all control of the USA.

Are you ready for that??

[dante805]

Its simple Obama needs to win VA and McCain needs Michigan. Thus, look for Kaine and Romney to be VP - stupid media cant get over Hillary. Any other choice makes no sense.

[demwatcher]

The only ones obsessing are the Liberals. They are so insecure about Obama that they want a new poll every hour.