SNAP Blog Page
 

Rich on the Road

by RichardRay from Dallas, TX

Last Post 159 days, 1 hour Ago


In general, people who tell you they don't believe the polls are really just saying they don't like what the polls are telling them.  In this case, if you want John McCain elected president and not Barack Obama -- well, just don't believe the polls.

The fact is that polls over the last 50 years have been very accurate.  In a close race they can't tell you exactly who is going to win but, generally, they are within a couple percentage points of the outcome.

Having said that,  this year IS different.  And, the obstacles facing pollsters are much greater than they've been in the past.  I think voters are much more likely to lie to pollsters (for what reason I can't imagine other than just to be obstinate) and others are much more likely to refuse to answer (which makes more sense to me if they feel it's a privacy issue).  The emergence of cell phones has made it more difficult to get an accurate sample because pollsters have traditionally contacted people on landlines.  But, the overriding problem this year is in figuring out who will actually vote.  Blacks and young people have registered in much larger numbers than in the past.  From what we've seen in early voting, Blacks are clearly turning out in bigger numbers but there is evidence that, once again, young voters are largely no-shows.  Maybe they're waiting for election day.  To get an accurate sample pollsters need to figure out who really is a likely voter.  The old models are not going to work this time. 

Thus, the polls are all over the place.  They all show Obama leading but the range is ridiculous -- from 15 points to a narrow 2 or 3.

I think Exit Polling is going to be even more difficult to do accurately.  Suspect Exit Poll numbers in 2000 caused all sorts of confusion.  In response, everyone was much more careful with the Exit Poll numbers in 2004 but they were worse.  The Washington Post called the 2004 Exit Poll results the most inaccurate ever.   Add to that the growing influence of Early Voting (half the Texas vote or more will be over by today) and Exit Polls get really complicated.

Then there's the so-called Bradley Factor.  Named after a Los Angeles mayor who ran for the Senate decades ago.  Polled as if he were in the lead the whole way but then got beat.  The conclusion was that in Californa then, at least, some white voters would claim they were voting for a Black candidate but then would not actually cast their ballot for him.  Most political observers will tell you that the Bradley Factor has not been seen in decades but....  Well, it's still being tossed around as a possibility this time.

If I was a betting man (I'm not except for the occasional soda wager) I would put my money on Obama.  The polls can occasionally be wrong.  But, they will have to be substantially wrong  for John McCain to win.  Every tossup state will have to go his way and a couple of states that look like sure wins for Obama will have to break right, too.

Still - something tells me unusual things could happen on Tuesday.  John McCain is predicting an upset like we had 60 years ago -- 1948 Democrat Harry Truman -- declared dead in the polls -- instead beat Republican Tom Dewey.

The final poll is always the one that counts.  And, we should know about that one pretty early Tuesday night.  If McCain holds on to Ohio and the other battleground states that George Bush won four years ago, there will be a race.  If Virginia and Ohio -- maybe even North Carolina go for Obama -- it's probably over. 

Either way, I'm ready for it all to be over.

Rich   

15 Comments |  Add a Comment

Member Comments Total Comments: 15
Page 1 of 1
putonyourbigpants read my blog view my photos
Oct 31, 2008 | 2:42 PM

Question? Liberal media for the most part, Fox national, John McCain, Barrack Obama, all say that race "will barely have an effect on the election". The question is, if this is what is being said, yet all are out of touch with what the common joe is living with, dealing with, and witnessing; what are the odds that no matter who is elected that there is conflict in the common America, and later escalating to a full scale Kaotic social war where folks of ALL CREED AND COLOR start getting hurt. Racism is supposed to be all but dead, yet not 4 - 6 months ago y'all did a story on racism in Arlington where a "Baby Boomer" 55 plus yr old woman sprayed the N word on a family's garage door. Your a man of balance and fairness...What say you?

Chris_Frisco read my blog
Oct 31, 2008 | 4:28 PM

I think the polls are wrong and are intentially wrong. I also believe it's closer than the media knows ore will say and that McCain will win handily.

bink765 read my blog view my photos
Oct 31, 2008 | 4:43 PM

Chris,

I hope you are correct in your statement. I would love nothing more to see the final outcome in favor of McCain on Tuesday night.

I just wish I could have as much confidence as you.

I've already voted and I voted McCain and darn proud of it.

outspoken1 read my blog
Oct 31, 2008 | 5:00 PM

If your right, I'm gonna have a McCain didn't win party at my house. I can't think of anything that would make me happier right now.

I am so tired of watching the egotestical, lol, idiot run his pie hole. I just can't imagine having to listen to the chosen one for 4 years.

RichardRay read my blog view my photos
Oct 31, 2008 | 5:16 PM

puton
Racism and discrimination can never be totally eradicated, in my humble opinion. Our human nature leaves us susceptible to "them and us" thinking. Whether it is skin color or political party or ethnic group. That's one of the reasons I keep praying for a generation of leaders who can unite us instead of divide us. Adversity can unite us, occasionally. But it doesn't seem to last in good times. September 11th for example. The first Great Depression was another, at least the way my parents and grandparents described it.
Unfortunately, you don't win elections with positive campaigns. At least, in this age. You win by demonizing the opponent. That's our fault.
Rich

RichardRay read my blog view my photos
Oct 31, 2008 | 5:42 PM

Chris
"the polls are wrong and are Intentionally wrong"
Does that include the Fox News poll released today? Putting Obama up by 3%?
Fox and everybody else part of a grand conspiracy to lie about their results?
Really. Hadn't heard that one.
Rich

Marks read my blog view my photos
Oct 31, 2008 | 5:54 PM

Rich, I largely concur with your analysis.

My solitary quibble is with the so-called "Bradley Effect" and the use of such an erroneous theory. You might want to read this article by Deukmejian campaign pollster V. Lance Tarrance, Jr.

History has a habit of being reconstructed to fit the opinions of those who color the commentary du jour. Aside from my living in San Diego during that election (and as you can tell I have been interested in politics for many years), I had to deal with the political aftermath with the punditry going back and forth on how it happened.

That the "Bradley Effect" is still around today means either Mr. Tarrance is losing (or has completely lost) the war of historical documentation, or certain folks are studiously ignoring it. My bet is both...

RichardRay read my blog view my photos
Oct 31, 2008 | 6:01 PM

Marks
The article you cite is a good one. Most who have studied the thing don't think the Bradley Effect has been a factor at all in recent races and, maybe, never was. And, you are right I should have labeled it the "Bradley Effect" instead of Bradley Factor. Brain fluff.
Rich

scottythecomic read my blog view my photos
Oct 31, 2008 | 6:07 PM

Rasmussen is one of the most accurate.

Marks read my blog view my photos
Oct 31, 2008 | 6:17 PM

Rich, California back then was still quite amenable to Republicans (unlike today). After having Governor Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown in office for so long, California was ripe for a change.

That polls solidified so late in the campaign actually showed the campaigns were being run rather well by both Deukmejian and Bradley. However, Los Angeles was used quite effectively as a deterrent to Bradley's ability to govern effectively.

Many voters (including yours truly) not of the LA area have a generally poor opinion of the city, and Deukmejian was able to tie LA to Bradley and make it a referendum for the rest of the state.

Naturally, revisionist history simply calls it the "Bradley Effect"... :)

DDawg read my blog view my photos
Oct 31, 2008 | 7:43 PM

I recently heard a pundit refer to the "Reverse Bradley Effect", people who in public will not admit to voting for the black guy voting for Obama once the curtain is drawn. It's a bit of a stretch, but at this point so is an upset by McCain. If anything I think it will be either a very close race with a slight win by McCain, or a complete slaughter by Obama.

I can't wait for it to be over either way. Scotty is going to owe me a steak dinner I think... :)

TexanInfidel read my blog view my photos
Oct 31, 2008 | 8:26 PM

Excellent assessment, Rich. A few more things to think about:

1) tons of Republicans registered to vote in the Democratic primaries (changed party affiliation) after McCain locked up the Republican nomination. Many polls are weighted based on percentage of population with each pary affiliation.

2) an Obama campaign worker (ex-HRC supporter) defected to vote McCain and revealed the Obama campaign strategy to flood blogs, polls, etc with people pretending to be ex-GOP voters who were going for Obama and to make it appear that the whole world wanted Obama. This ex-campaign worker said that their intention was to make his victory appear inevitable.

3) everyone I know that is voting for the first time was voting McCain - I think the first-time voter turnout will even out, even though it was predicted to go to Obama.

4) the only pollsters to get 2004 right (Zogby and ibdm?) says it is anyone's race.

Marks read my blog view my photos
Oct 31, 2008 | 9:49 PM

According to Drudge, Zogby will report a 1-point lead for Obama tomorrow.

Marks read my blog view my photos
Oct 31, 2008 | 10:14 PM

Sorry, I booted that call:

Here is the correct call.

McCain plus one? Wow...

Damage483 read my blog view my photos
Nov 1, 2008 | 3:23 AM

Yep, McCain up 1% is what Zogby has up now. I heard that there have been something like 700+ polls this election cycle. Is that crazy or what?? And like Rich said, with swings from as much as 15 points to 1 point, it's gotten pretty crazy. I think we're all ready for this to be over yesterday.

Page 1 of 1


Write your comment below:




RichardRay

RICH ON THE ROAD I am blessed with a truly remarkable job that for decades now has permitted me to see corners of the world, far and near. When I'm not on the road for Fox 4 News in Dallas/Fort Worth, I'm often traveling with my wife Catherine -- occasionally on mission trips in Africa or Latin America with our home church (Prince of Peace Lutheran in Carrollton). My contribution to this page began largely as a Travel-blog -- sharing current and many of my past experiences in traveling America and the globe. I'm tryng, as we go along, to wade into a wider range of topics without getting in too much trouble. Richard Ray

Member Since: 5/29/2006