TheAgitator.com
Polling and Ron Paul
Monday, December 3rd, 2007Ron Paul continues to make progress in the polls, though nothing like the kind of surge Mike Huckabee’s getting.
But here’s a question: Paul consistently gets about half the support in polls conducted by American Research Group and Fox News than he gets in other polls. This has been true for some time. When he was polling in the 4-5 range in most polls, Fox and ARG had him at 2-3. Now he’s somewhere between 6 and 8 in most polls, but stuck at 3-4 with Fox and ARG. This seems to be holding true both in national polls and in the early primary state polls.
I’m wondering why this would be. The “who will you be voting for” question is pretty straightforward. And the samples are taken from “likely voters.” And one would presume both Opinion Dynamics (which conducts the Opinion Dynamics polls) and ARG use accepted polling practices.
I’m not positing any conspiracy theories, here. I’m genuinely curious about what nuances in polling practices would consistently result in a candidate getting about half the support he’s getting in other polls.
The question may be straightforward, but something as seemingly innocuous as question phrasing can make a 3-4% difference in a poll. Check to see if the OD poll lists the candidates while the Fox/ARG poll does not. For a candidate like Paul who doesn’t have the recognition of Giuliani, McCain, Romney, or Huckabee, this could be significant, and indicative of a deficiency in Paul’s campaign.
Also, if both list candidates, see if they vary the order in which the candidates are listed - if Paul’s stuck down ARG’s list, his support would be depressed (likewise, if Paul is stuck at the top of the OD list, he’d probably be inflated a bit).
Compared to Fox and ARG, it looks as though Rasmussen lists fewer Republican candidates (no Hunter, no Tancredo). Prior to its preference question, the Suffolk (New Hampshire) poll has an esteem question for some of the candidates including Paul but not including several others. On both counts I’d say Fox and ARG are using the superior practice.
The ARG poll wording:
If the 2008 Republican presidential preference primary were being held today between (names rotated) Sam Brownback, Rudy Giuliani, Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter, John McCain, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Tom Tancredo, Fred Thompson, and Tommy Thompson, for whom would you vote?
Would you say that you definitely plan to vote in the 2008 Republican presidential primary, that you might vote in the 2008 Republican presidential primary, or that you will probably not vote in the 2008 Republican presidential primary?
Fox News/Opinion Dynamics:
If the 2008 Republican presidential primary were held today for whom would you vote if the candidates were: (randomized list of all candidates)
And their poll was of registered voters, not likely voters, if I read the right paperwork.
Are likely voters registered voters when it comes to polling? Are these polls done when soap operas are on during the day or when dumbass survivor/american idol shows are on at night? Like recent high-profile juries it looks like the country is braindead.
A sampling error doesn’t have to be a conspiracy. There is a very real possibility that Ron Paul is rallying a constituency that has participated very little in politics before and simply has a far to low representation in the sample rosters.
This might explain why he wins the straw polls and the donations, but not the polls off the old lists.
I’ve never voted for president. I avoid lists at every chance. I don’t own a cell phone and haven’t answered my land line in a long time. If it isn’t a check in the mail it doesn’t get opened. When I was attending RP Meetups, at least half of the group expressed similar situations to mine in that they would never even have a chance to be counted in one of those polls nor would they want to be counted.
I’m in the key early state of Iowa. Ron Paul is doing better than 5% here for Republicans. He is literally the ONLY Republican candidate with any visible support in the entire Corridor(Iowa City/Cedar Rapids/Cedar Falls) area. Drive around and you’ll see Hillary, Obama and Ron Paul signs, that’s it. While the last bits of info I’ve provided don’t back up your post, the info on the following link might. http://www.wvmetronews.com/index.cfm?func=displayfullstory&storyid=22381
There is the head of the West Virginia Republican State Convention confirming that Ron Paul is in the top four for support from committed delegates. On top of that, 45% of the large number of delegates have not committed.
Is Ron beating Rudy nationally at this point? Of course not. If the Republican primaries were held today would Ron Paul get more than 5%? Everything I look at, except those national polls, says that yes Ron would get well over 5%.
What is the definition of “likely Republican Voter?”
I believe for most of the pollsters cited, the working definition of “likely Republican Votes” is someone who voted in the last ( 2004) Republican primary.
I believe that the current president was unopposed in the 2004 primary. So the polls are polling folks who voted in a one candidate primary.
I think a more interesting question is who will Ron Paul choose as his running mate for the presidential elections and what pair will be the sacrificial opposition.
Do a youtube search on the Florida Strawpoll, the shenanigans that goes on in some of these straw polls is outrageous and Texas was not much better.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8wjJieSib0
All such polls are, of course, biased by the views of the folks who watch [say] Fox News. As a long-time LP member, I agree with perhaps 95 per cent of what Ron Paul says. I have been rather astonished at the level of vitriol that emanates from many Republicans when Ron Paul is discussed. They seem almost as wacky as those Democrats who are plagued with BDS. So, perhaps the polls merely reflect the more-Republican-than-Democrat views of those who watch Fox News and ARG [I really don't know anything about ARG, by the way].
‘Leaners’ and Polling Bias
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/lindgren1.html
The people who do these polls are gripping for relevance in light of social networks which provide a much larger pool of evidence. The fact that polling matters to people is why they’re broken. Since they have an effect, they always have a deceptive cause and so they hide their sample bias behind a label of “scientific.”
Ron Paul Rocks !!!
The reason the polls are flawed is that Ron Paul is curing the Apathy of those who were disgusted by voting for the lesser of two evils.
Those voices unheard before will be present in the next choosing.
There will be surprise again.
Ron Paul is the people’s choice! He has been dominating in the straw polls, debate polls, fundraising, web traffic and grass roots networking for a long time now. He is clearly a “top tier” candidate. I have gathered the evidence to support this statement and created a website.
Please visit http://www.thecaseforronpaul.com and judge for yourself.
I noticed the same thing about ARG recently and was wondering about it. I don’t know what they are doing different than the other polling people.