« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

We need real, useful primary polling

By: Neil Stevens (Diary)  |  June 30th, 2011 at 08:00 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Bachmann Romney

So Fox News put out a new poll of the race for the Republican Presidential nomination. It’s a typical poll in many ways, but Fox’s bit of analysis got me to thinking: Polls like this favor frontrunners and likely skew the race.

Again, the poll (conducted by the pair Anderson Robbins Research with Shaw & Company Research) is pretty straightforward: 324 Republican Primary Voters, mix of landlines and mobile phones, MoE 5.5. Mitt Romney leads with 18% support. Here’s the problem though: his opposition is scattered between 19(!) other names. If there were 19 other candidates, that would be understandable, but note Fox’s analysis:

Former Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney remains the top pick for the GOP presidential nomination from voters, but three rivals are close behind — including two who haven’t announced their candidacy.

That’s right, this poll is diluted with unannounced candidates including Rick Perry, Rudy Giuliani, Sarah Palin, Chris Christie (volunteered), Donald Trump (vol.), Mike Huckabee (vol.), and Jeb Bush (vol). Together those seven received 35%, just short of double Mitt Romney’s support. Note that Trump has quit the race, Huckabee agonized before deciding not to run, and Christie has denied running in the strongest terms. They have no business being in the poll, either as listed choices or valid volunteered answers.

Even the other names, who remain possibilities, shouldn’t be in the poll. Sure, Rick Perry could run, but he still might not. The same goes for Sarah Palin. I personally think a Rudy Giuliani run is incredibly unlikely after his miserable failure in 2008, and Jeb Bush still needs more time for his name to be less of an issue. Letting these names be listed or volunteered scatters the vote in ways that cannot happen when the actual primaries and caucuses arrive.

What would happen if that 35% of the Republican primary voters had to choose between Mitt Romney (18%), Michele Bachmann (second place among declared candidates with 11%), Ron Paul (7%), Herman Cain (5%), Tim Pawlenty (3%), Newt Gingrich (3%), John Huntsman (3%), Rick Santorum (2%), Gary Johnson (1%), and other candidates whose support rounded down to zero? We don’t know.

Ridiculously enough, Fox did try an alternative lineup. Fox polled with and without Giuliani. Big whoop.

We need real polls of real candidates. Until we get them, we’re just playing games for headlines.

Crossposted from Unlikely Voter

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

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • Darin_H

    “Until we get them, we?re just playing games for headlines.”

    I don’t know what else to add.

  • http://www.michiganconservativeunion.com Ron Estrada

    I keep reading these polls that show Romney in the lead, yet whenever I’m in a room full of Michigan Republicans (known to be RINOs), I hear groans when his name is mentioned. Tea Partiers get downright nasty when his name comes up. I don’t see it. Once a few people drop out, their followers will shift toward anyone but Romney.

  • Jim Tomasik

    Those polls are a joke.

    Why not set up a real poll done by RedState of only declared candidates. Never mind the “What if ole so-and-so gets in…”

    Not sure what that would take for it to be considered legit but it could not be any worse than silly Fox News polls.

  • smitch61

    Michigander, I hear you……

  • edintexas

    This early, polling is really a joke. The Iowa cauci and New Hampshire primary are still a long way off (and slowly becoming more and more immaterial to Republican candidates).

  • smitch61

    None of these polls matter right now, none of the pundits matter right now. It frustrates me..

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    it’s still mental masturbation. Head to head polling is a total waste of time this far out. How about F/U polling done ever other week on a significantly (!) larger sample. That way we could follow a trend, which is the ONLY meaningful polling at this stage.

    I’d also like to see the F/U done in two distinct pieces. One for Republican Primary voters and another for General Election voters.

  • Tbone

    is the amount of influence pissant states like Iowa and New Hampshire have on anointing the frontrunners.

  • YnotNOW

    Poll takers should take an issue, give the responses to this issue from a number of “leading candidates”, and see which POSITION voters like best.

    The candidate that has the highest cumulative score among selected issue responses would then be the “front runner” of the poll.

    I know, there is much more to a candidate than stated position topics, but at this point in the election cycle, it would be a more valid evaluation of support than name-recognition and media face-time.

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

    Horserace polling is validated by actual results.

    How do you validate issue polling?

  • YnotNOW

    So they aren’t really “validated” either (though they are often used to show “momentum” which is just as weak as the early polls.

    Issue polling at least gives some sense of what voters WANT to see in a candidate, even if they are not yet shure of which candidate really embodies those policies/features.

    So it is just as “non-valid” but does give some valuable info.

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

    I see.

  • The_Gadfly

    Well, the media types who keep running the polls, and the northeastern liberal republicans they keep seeding in the call list.

    As I see it, he had one shot at a clear run and he blew it: Declare that although he did his utmost to bring market principles into a healthcare mandate in a far-left state, Romneycare was a failure and he would therefore sign a repeal of Obamacare as soon as it hit his desk. But he didn’t do that. Instead he tried to have it both ways, which is a position DOOMED to failure.

    Granted, I would still prefer Cain, Bachman, Pawlenty, Santorum, or Perry over Mitt. But I would at least respect the man. But the ham-handedness of his actual response marks him with exactly the sort of inside the beltway thinking that got us into the current mess.

  • The_Gadfly

    and I like the idea of the candidates starting in locations where the little guy can win. Start in PA or any other non-”pissant” state and you could already declare Mitt the winner of the current contest.

  • lineholder

    It’s the trending patterns that are most indicative at this point. The most substantive poll I’ve found so far, which does include F/U, is the weekly Gallup poll. It doesn’t break it down to Repub/General Election voters, though. That data would be interesting, wouldn’t it?

    Do you know of any other sites that are conducting polls which could be used for trending analysis?

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    because it has good football. That is how I characterize states. If they have either good college or pro football, then they meet my minimum requirements.

    States like Iowa and New Hampshire? PPFFT! Please! The Hawkeyes havn’t been a factor for decades and New Hampshire has nothing. They have no right being the first primary states!

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    The modern day Gerald Ford. We just have to understand that the “establishment” Republicans are still around and still have some influence..

    Sure he would be much better than Obama, but at this time we need a bit more than that to escape catastrophe.

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

    You know, states that actually vote Republican for President more reliably.

  • Remington_Steele

    .

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

    There are plenty of posts and diaries for Romney bashing. This is not one of them.

    thanks,

  • runner12

    the way this polling was done. It always helps when we are able to see the methodology behind the polling so that we can better assess its validity and/or veracity.

  • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

    Run their primaries in reverse order. The most loyal go first.

  • rightwingmom52

    .

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    The Anti-Mitt threads I mean.

    Not really, he is a heck of a good fellow, I just think we can do better for president.

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    that LSU is going to beat the Tide and Nick Satan again this year.

    Yeah! thats right! Not too early for a little college football trash talk.

    Never bet against Les Miles and his giant brass ones.

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

    .

  • rightwingmom52

    And here’s some more trash talk for you. The Hat is going down at least twice. For the record, I’m an Alabama fan only by marriage and offspring (my son). My first football love is UT, as in Tennessee, who I’m betting will beat LSU fair and square this year without any controversial calls.

    But I’m glad we’re on the same side of the political aisle!

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    on the Vols beating anyone but Vandy this year! Les is a God and Nick is the Devil!

  • dilligas

    At this point, with so many in the field, I’d prefer to see some type of polling that allows the respondent to name a preferred short list. The preferred candidate may not have a realistic shot, but the second and third choice may. It would make sorting out the polls a bit tougher perhaps, but could show how strong a candidate really is among the people.

    Example: With the current numbers above, while not likely, perhaps the people who opted for T-Paw on down have as their second choice Cain. At that point, he now would have 17% and be in the mix.

    In my opinion, it frees up people who really like Candidate B, but since they feel that Candidate B doesn’t have a chance, they note Candidate A as their choice since they feel they do.

    [Hopefully that makes sense.]

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

    I just don’t think it’s relevant with all the dilution…

  • YnotNOW

    You are right that issue polling cannot be “validated” by real-world results, but neither can early horserace poll results, which are only compared to later poll results, which are then (eventually) compared to actual election results.

    So neither are validated. But issue polling may give you some useful information, instead of just name-recognition.

  • YnotNOW

    because it allows the lesser-known candidates to develop a following and build momentum (and therefore fundraising) toward bigger contests that are primarily TV/Radio contests.
    (you are right that Mitch would win if a big state started the momentum).

    My suggestion (FWIW):
    Random first state under 10 electoral votes goes first (different every cycle)

    Random small state or combination under 20 electoral votes go as a batch a few weeks later.

    Random combination of states totaling under 40 electoral votes a few weeks after
    Then 80 EV
    Then 160 EV
    Until we’re done.

    That way lesser-known candidates would have a chance to start small and build. But the later contests that build upon that would also have a large enough block to have a chance to overturn earlier results. And therefore everyone would feel like they at least have a CHANCE of their vote in the primary would make a difference.

    Just my ideal world, which is unlikely to happen… :)

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    PPP.

    There will be screams that they are a Lefty pollster, and there’s some truth to that, but all I look at is the F/U trend polling and that’s pretty consistent and you don’t have to deal with the mix of R/D/I in the sample.

  • lineholder

    Granted, their data might be useful for trending, but not much more than that.

  • Tbone

    Iowa? I could win in Iowa. I would just promise them all shoes that match.

  • Tbone

    California wouldn’t get to vote until 2 years after the election.

  • lineholder

    either way it goes.

  • acat

    have *their* issues on the front burner once in a while, instead of just Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.

    Also looks to encourage a more varied strategy from our candidates. (the last real change in strategy was .. what? the “southern strategy” ?)

    Mew

  • acat

    To be fair, I know far too much about Iowa’s issues, and don’t really care.

    Since I don’t have the foggiest idea what Oklahoma’s issues are, other than figuring out how to link their tollway system to *any* *other* system, that wouldn’t be a bad thing…. it would at least be different!

    Mew

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    As long as you pay attention to the internals, they’re a heck of a lot better than Gallup or half dozen others.

  • Tbone

    misses me. You know the feeling. LOL

  • YnotNOW

    could push this at RNC levels?

    just an idea…

  • votegaryjohnson

    Gary Johnson is a breath of fresh air compared to the other republican candidates. He is honest and smart! Its so nice not to be pandered to by slick talking sound bite politicians. Gary Johnson speaks slowly and eloquently, which does not lend itself to debates.

    I believe Governor Gary Johnson is Obamas biggest threat. Its really hard for Obummers re-election team to paint a pro-choice, pro-gay rights, anti war GOP candidate who wants to legalize marijuana as a right wing extremist. His socially liberal stances will be attractive to democrat and independent voters. Not to mention he was a very successful two term(that’s one more term than mitt romney) republican Governor in new mexico a state that is 2 to 1 democrat. He left office with a billion dollar surplus and was arguably the most fiscally conservative governor ever. He is a true Statesman and practices good stewardship of your tax dollars.

    He also will not engage in mud slinging or name calling. He ran two campaigns in NM where he never mentioned his opponent. He will stick to the issues and not try to blame obama. I met Gary Johnson twice last year in my state of MO.. Once when he spoke at UMKC and another event he spoke at Missouri Southern State University. in Joplin Mo. He took the time to answer all my questions and sincerely listened to my concerns.. He is obviously working harder than the other candidates! For this he has earned my vote and support!

  • The_Gadfly

    your proposal makes such tremendous and irrefutable sense that it will NEVER be adopted. Much to the detriment of all of us.