« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Examining the PPP Likely Voter screen

By: Neil Stevens (Diary)  |  October 27th, 2010 at 01:00 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

PPP

By request, I’ve decided to take a look at just what kind of electorate the Public Policy Polling screening of Likely Voters seems to be predicting. To do this I will use recent PPP polls from two states: California, which went for Barack Obama heavily, and West Virginia, where Obama’s popularity has never been that hot.

First, we look at West Virginia. I see two key stats: PPP says the state’s Likely Voters went for McCain 54-38 (MoE 2.8) and show a registration advantage for Democrats 55-35.

The natural place to look for a baseline for these numbers was the wave for the Democrats in 2008, in the exit polling from that year. If PPP’s numbers look like those, or better, then PPP is projecting a wave for the Democrats this year, most likely.

And so for the West Virginia Senate race in 2008, we see that the partisan breakdown per CNN was 49 D-33 R (MoE 3, if you believe Exit Polls are as random as we need them to be). So while the exit poll last time showed a D+16 registration advantage, PPP this time shows a D+20 registration advantage, seeming to project and even larger wave for the Democrats.

Further if we check the Presidential returns for West Virginia, we see that the state went for McCain 56-43 (no MoE, as this is the actual result), or R+13. PPP shows the state going for McCain 54-38, R+16. So even more oddly, PPP seems to be suggesting a wave of Democrats who dislike Barack Obama. Schwa?

Moving onto California, PPP shows Barack Obama winning 57-37, and Democrats with a 47 D-34 R-19 Other registration advantage. The actual CA result was 61-37 Obama, and the CA exit poll showed a 42-30-28 registration advantage. So PPP seems to be showing fewer independents, more Democrats, and fewer Republicans in California than 2008. And unlike WV, CA doesn’t even show any additional support for John McCain than the actual 2008 election. No anti-Obama, anti-Democrat, or even anti-incumbent wave at all, really.

If you think that’s likely, then PPP’s likely voter screen should be accurate. If you don’t, then PPP’s results need to be adjusted mentally before being digested. And that’s not fraud, by the way, as some will say. That’s just an inability of PPP’s model to handle back to back wave years in opposite directions, which is a pretty minor failing of a model I believe.

From Unlikely Voter.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • zipbags

    Rasmussen now has Manchin up by 3pts in West Virginia. WTF???
    Yes, I know its a traditionally Dem state and Manchin is popular. But, I don’t care if Manchin votes 100% against Obama. He has a “D” after his name. And unless he caucusses with the Repubs that gives the Dems control of the senate. According to a new Rasmussen Poll. Manchin is up by 3 or 4. Ugh!

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/west_virginia/election_2010_west_virginia_senate_special_election

  • jaybo

    Neil You stated the following.

    “That?s just an inability of PPP?s model to handle back to back wave years in opposite directions, which is a pretty minor failing of a model I believe.”

    That’s not a minor failing it is a major failing. PPP describes itself as professional polling organization. That assumes that they have a degree of knowledge and competency in their (supposed) area of expertise. If a layperson like yourself identifies problems with their statistical models then they have a big personnel problem at the very least.

    Maybe it’s just coincidence but isn’t it funny (strange) that Daily Kos has paid to use this polling agency as well. What if it simply comes down to the customer gets what the customer wants?

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
  • The_Rebel

    Neil makes it seem like PPP’s model is a computer-controlled environment where no human interaction comes into play. Whatever model they are using has been constructed by staff or consultants at PPP, and the computers are only spitting out the results of that input.

    As the old saying goes, garbage in, garbage out.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Are you suggesting Jensen should create new, ad-hoc models for every election to meet what his personal views of the electorate are? Rather than creating one, consistent model to try to predict objectively what the electorate will look like?

  • The_Rebel

    What I’m saying is that no one model can possibly be reflective of all election cycles, what with all the early voting now, the increase in the use of absentee ballots, not to mention the mood of the electorate from one cycle to the next. Models should be a work-in-progress that need tweaking from time to time.

    If a Dem leaning poll consistently shows statistics that favors Dems in terms of sampling, then I cannot trust the accuracy of such a poll.

  • mark1957

    Given the wide spread reports of early voter fraud maybe rasmussen considers it in their model. Just sayin’.

  • seattlebruce

    “Rather than creating one, consistent model to try to predict objectively what the electorate will look like?”

    Polling is clearly a tricky science – perhaps even a pseudo science for most pollsters. For instance how do you arrive a statistical MoE based on a sample size that is itself based on estimates of the Census estimates? That said, they’re not completely useless, I suppose, at least the pollsters that have displayed accurate results right around polling time.

    http://www.fordham.edu/images/academics/graduate_schools/gsas/elections_and_campaign_/poll%20accuracy%20in%20the%202008%20presidential%20election.pdf

    The following list ranks the 23 organizations by the accuracy of their final, national pre-election polls (as reported on pollster.com).
    1. Rasmussen (11/1-3)**
    1. Pew (10/29-11/1)**
    2. YouGov/Polimetrix (10/18-11/1)
    3. Harris Interactive (10/20-27)
    4. GWU (Lake/Tarrance) (11/2-3)*
    5. Diageo/Hotline (10/31-11/2)*
    5. ARG (10/25-27)*
    6. CNN (10/30-11/1)
    6. Ipsos/McClatchy (10/30-11/1)
    7. DailyKos.com (D)/Research 2000 (11/1-3)
    8. AP/Yahoo/KN (10/17-27)
    9. Democracy Corps (D) (10/30-11/2)
    10. FOX (11/1-2)
    11. Economist/YouGov (10/25-27)
    12. IBD/TIPP (11/1-3)
    13. NBC/WSJ (11/1-2)
    14. ABC/Post (10/30-11/2)
    15. Marist College (11/3)
    16. CBS (10/31-11/2)
    17. Gallup (10/31-11/2)
    18. Reuters/ C-SPAN/ Zogby (10/31-11/3)
    19. CBS/Times (10/25-29)
    20. Newsweek (10/22-23)

    I don’t see PPP on this list. Not sure where they fell in the 2008 results. They are clearly getting their bread buttered by the far left.

    Also, the pollster at the top, may not completely control the inclinations of his team, he also may be too lax in his enforcement of the statistical rules in favor of who is buttering the bread.

    Democrats tend to look for ways to eliminate results (even entire elections) that don’t favor them, in exchange for other results – often making up rules as they go…and they justify themselves with a supposed moral superiority.

    This is why we don’t trust them.

    Believe me – we saw the theft in King County, Washington in 2004.

  • congressworksforus

    Undersampling independents. It’s a shell game; reduce the Indies (who always decide the election in the end) and pump up the R or D, or both. Make the race look like one thing, when it’s entirely another.

    By the way, I’d look at 2004 as the correct election to predict Republican turnout. Remember that GOTV in 2004? The GOTV that stunned all the pundits and gifted the election to Bush?

    That’s what’s coming on the ‘R’ side. But it’s not coming on the ‘D’ side.

    Both Whitman and Fiorina will win in CA, because of all the money that Whitman has spent building the ground game necessary for the GOTV. Brown is relying on the unions, which isn’t enough this time, not even in CA.

  • The_Rebel

    are far down on the list, and Newsweek is last.

  • swami7774

    ….what is your opinion of Nate Silver at 538? He’s made some verrry interesting adjustments on MA-10.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens