Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
Sun Jul 12, 2015, 03:23 AM Jul 2015

On AFT polling behind Clinton endorsement and members who were not polled

This is the para on polling in the AFT announcement via press release:

The AFT has conducted a long, deliberative process to assess which candidate would best champion the issues of importance to our members, their families and communities. Members have been engaged online, through the "You Decide" website, through several telephone town halls, and through multiple surveys—reaching more than 1 million members.

http://www.aft.org/press-release/american-federation-teachers-endorses-hillary-clinton-president

With the claim in the press release that they'd reached "more than 1 million members" being so prominent, it should be expected that some would think a general vote had been taken and wonder why they weren't part of it. They link to the "You Decide" webpage that then leads you to a representative sample poll. So, even though most didn't receive a call, as I'm sure you know, if the sample was properly selected then, then a poll like this with a sample of 1150 should be an accurate assessment of member preferences.

The link to the 'YouDecide" page:
http://www.aft.org/election2016

And that links to the only actual hard data made available - the poll summary from June 2015:
http://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/memo_presidentialsurvey2015.pdf

You can view the pollster's analysis at the above link. This is the ex summary:
This memo highlights key findings from a new national survey among 1,150 AFT members who are registered to vote. The survey explored members’ attitudes toward AFT’s issue agenda and the 2016 presidential election. Interviewing was conducted by telephone from June 22 to 27. The survey’s margin of error is ±3.3percentage points among all voters, and ±4.1 percentage points for Democratic primary voters (n=683)

So, even though most didn't receive a call, if the sample was properly selected then, with a sample of 1150 it should be an accurate assessment of member preferences.

There is, however, a most obvious problem with the survey, and that is the timing. The campaign is just starting and Sanders is moving very quickly to close the gap in voter market after voter market. In the two weeks since the poll was taken it is highly likely the sentiments expressed have changed significantly. If the effort to select a candidate were being done in good faith, I'd expect the trend line to be a major part of the discussion. (It should be noted the "resolution on the endorsement" points out that the PRIMARY endorsement is "traditionally" not by member vote. The text is included at the end of this post.)

That this single polling snapshot of this specific environment was used as justification for the endorsement indicates to me the recommendation is far more politically derived than member derived. I don't blame those who want a 3rd Way candidate to win again for doing something like this, but the transparently political manner of doing it smacks of more desperation from HRC's campaign than I expected.

Bernie has changed all of the dynamics of this race.

PS: Re Hillary and the 3rd Way, I'd like to point out that she was '3rd Way' before there was a '3rd Way'.
...In 1965, Rodham enrolled at Wellesley College, where she majored in political science. During her first year, she served as president of the Wellesley Young Republicans; with this Rockefeller Republican-oriented group, she supported the elections of Mayor John Lindsay and Senator Edward Brooke. She later stepped down from this position, as her views changed regarding the American Civil Rights Movement and the Vietnam War. In a letter to her youth minister at this time, she described herself as "a mind conservative and a heart liberal". In contrast to the 1960s current that advocated radical actions against the political system, she sought to work for change within it. In her junior year, Rodham became a supporter of the antiwar presidential nomination campaign of Democrat Eugene McCarthy. Following the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., Rodham organized a two-day student strike and worked with Wellesley's black students to recruit more black students and faculty. In early 1968, she was elected president of the Wellesley College Government Association and served through early 1969; she was instrumental in keeping Wellesley from being embroiled in the student disruptions common to other colleges. A number of her fellow students thought she might some day become the first female President of the United States. To help her better understand her changing political views, Professor Alan Schechter assigned Rodham to intern at the House Republican Conference, and she attended the "Wellesley in Washington" summer program. Rodham was invited by moderate New York Republican Representative Charles Goodell to help Governor Nelson Rockefeller's late-entry campaign for the Republican nomination. Rodham attended the 1968 Republican National Convention in Miami. However, she was upset by the way Richard Nixon's campaign portrayed Rockefeller and by what she perceived as the convention's "veiled" racist messages, and left the Republican Party for good.

Rodham wrote her senior thesis, a critique of the tactics of radical community organizer Saul Alinsky, under Professor Schechter. (Years later, while she was First Lady, access to the thesis was restricted at the request of the White House and it became the subject of some speculation.) In 1969, she graduated with a Bachelor of Arts, with departmental honors in political science. Following pressure from some fellow students, she became the first student in Wellesley College history to deliver its commencement address. Her speech received a standing ovation lasting seven minutes.] She was featured in an article published in Life magazine, due to the response to a part of her speech that criticized Senator Brooke, who had spoken before her at the commencement. She also appeared on Irv Kupcinet's nationally syndicated television talk show as well as in Illinois and New England newspapers. That summer, she worked her way across Alaska, washing dishes in Mount McKinley National Park and sliming salmon in a fish processing cannery in Valdez (which fired her and shut down overnight when she complained about unhealthy conditions).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton#Wellesley_College_years

My Opinion about that is this:
We do not need to promote more centralization of economic and political power. Seriously right now is absolutely not one of those times when we can just shrug off any candidate's the preference for economic rightwing policies (3W) making up BAU. We have skewed so far to the right that we risk a range of related, unprecedented catastrophes directly linked to those policies (climate, militarization, authoritarianism) unless we change course.




AFT Resolution
ENDORSEMENT OF HILLARY CLINTON

WHEREAS, the members of the American Federation of Teachers play a critical and active role in our democracy; and

WHEREAS, the AFT, its affiliates and its members have rededicated ourselves to reclaiming the promise of America for all our children, families and communities; and

WHEREAS, the 2016 presidential election, like any other presidential election, provides an opportunity to elect a president who shares our vision for America; and

WHEREAS, traditionally, the endorsement is decided in two phases: For the primaries, the AFT executive council, which is elected by the convention delegates to represent the full membership, makes endorsement recommendations. For the general election, our convention chooses our candidate; and (emphasis added - K)

WHEREAS, in considering an endorsement for president, the AFT considers which candidate shares our values, has the support of our members, and is strong and electable; and

WHEREAS, toward this end, since February 2015, the AFT has engaged our members in a variety of ways on both the issues and the candidates, has conducted two polls, has held two town hall forums, has established the "You Decide 2016" and the "You Got Schooled" websites, has conducted research on where each candidate stands, and has invited all candidates to complete a questionnaire and meet with our executive council; and

WHEREAS, Hillary Clinton has spent her entire career, both in the private and public sectors, working to ensure that everyone has an equal opportunity to climb the ladder of success; and

WHEREAS, Hillary Clinton has a proven record in leading the fight for high-quality healthcare, including proper staffing levels; for high-quality public education for all, starting with our youngest children; was an original co-sponsor of the Employee Free Choice Act; defended public service workers who came to our nation's defense on Sept. 11; and has a deep and long record on economic and social justice issues—from voting rights to immigrant rights to women's rights to worker rights—earning a 100 percent AFT voting record during her time in the U.S. Senate; and

WHEREAS, Hillary Clinton has pledged to help build an economy that produces good jobs and rising wages, and will work with educators, telling the AFT, "It's just dead wrong to make teachers the scapegoats for all of society's problems. Where I come from, teachers are the solution. And I strongly believe that unions are part of the solution too"; and

WHEREAS, the stakes are critically high in this election, when corporate-backed politicians want to preserve today's status quo—a rigged, trickle-down economic system—and to do that, they want to eviscerate unions; and

WHEREAS, these politicians know that unions give working people power at the bargaining table and the ballot box; and

WHEREAS, in a scientific poll conducted in late June 2015, 79 percent of members who can vote in the Democratic primary support a primary endorsement, and, by more than a 3-to-1 margin, those members prefer Hillary Clinton; and

WHEREAS, the AFT has received resolutions from several affiliates urging the executive council to endorse Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination; and

WHEREAS, the 2016 election campaign is already well underway and an endorsement now will enable the AFT to help shape the debate and drive an agenda to reclaim the promise of America; and

WHEREAS, Hillary Clinton is a tested leader who shares our values, is supported by AFT members, and is prepared for a tough fight in order to champion the interest of students, families and communities:

RESOLVED, that the American Federation of Teachers endorses Hillary Clinton for president in the Democratic primary; and

RESOLVED, that the AFT and its state and local affiliates commit to engaging and mobilizing our 1.6 million members, their families and their communities to reclaim the promise of America and to help secure the Democratic nomination for Hillary Clinton.

http://www.aft.org/resolution/endorsement-hillary-clinton
29 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
On AFT polling behind Clinton endorsement and members who were not polled (Original Post) kristopher Jul 2015 OP
1150 is not 1 million udbcrzy2 Jul 2015 #1
Yes, they said they did a phone survey of a million madfloridian Jul 2015 #3
Yes, so glad we all get to choose:) n/t udbcrzy2 Jul 2015 #4
Thanks. I took my link to the survey from the middle of that line. kristopher Jul 2015 #7
"Since February"? arcane1 Jul 2015 #14
Since February? HooptieWagon Jul 2015 #28
Where I live... 99Forever Jul 2015 #18
Move along, nothing to see:) udbcrzy2 Jul 2015 #20
It's what neoliberals do. 99Forever Jul 2015 #21
so, disputing the polling bigtree Jul 2015 #2
I thought they polled their members udbcrzy2 Jul 2015 #5
I would be happy had they waited til all candidates announced. cherokeeprogressive Jul 2015 #11
The text of the endorsement is sadly rife with propaganda and unproven assertions. Ford_Prefect Jul 2015 #6
Super-PAC money well spent, it seems. n/t arcane1 Jul 2015 #15
Why would a respected Democratic pollster DemocratSinceBirth Jul 2015 #17
Money. 99Forever Jul 2015 #19
I can not ascribe nefarious motives to individuals without sufficient evidence. DemocratSinceBirth Jul 2015 #22
Frankly sir, I don't give a damn what you do or don't ascribe to anyone. 99Forever Jul 2015 #23
That's fine that you don't care what I think. Anne Frank would think highly of me. DemocratSinceBirth Jul 2015 #24
... 99Forever Jul 2015 #25
In spite of everything I still believe that you are really good at heart... DemocratSinceBirth Jul 2015 #26
Of course I am. 99Forever Jul 2015 #27
Seriously good post. k&r. marble falls Jul 2015 #8
My colleagues LWolf Jul 2015 #9
So let me get this straight Sheepshank Jul 2015 #10
It's good to strive for accuracy. kristopher Jul 2015 #13
Perfect response to the latest poutrage. Metric System Jul 2015 #16
This explains it perfectly Le Taz Hot Jul 2015 #12
Exactly. HooptieWagon Jul 2015 #29
 

udbcrzy2

(891 posts)
1. 1150 is not 1 million
Sun Jul 12, 2015, 03:36 AM
Jul 2015

If they are claiming they polled 1 million and the memo highlights only 1150. That makes it very confusing.

madfloridian

(88,117 posts)
3. Yes, they said they did a phone survey of a million
Sun Jul 12, 2015, 03:43 AM
Jul 2015
http://www.aft.org/election2016

Since February, we've engaged members and leaders in the most extensive outreach we've ever done leading up to a primary endorsement. We conducted a phone survey calling more than 1 million members, commissioned a second major poll, and solicited your input online and in person. We wanted to know what issues mattered to you, which candidate you thought shared our values and who you believed could win.
- See more at: http://www.aft.org/election2016#sthash.se35qxxg.dpuf


It's over and done. The membership will vote as they please.

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
7. Thanks. I took my link to the survey from the middle of that line.
Sun Jul 12, 2015, 06:07 AM
Jul 2015

When I went to look for the 1M number again though, I ended up with the one posted above. I thought I'd misremembered the quote.

These kinds of antics do far too much harm to confidence in unions. I'm truly sorry to see it going on.

 

HooptieWagon

(17,064 posts)
28. Since February?
Sun Jul 12, 2015, 07:45 PM
Jul 2015

There wasn't a single declared candidate in February. The candidate questionnaires still haven't been released. The rush to make the endorsement this early appears to be more about the political ambitions of one person rather than the informed consensus of the membership.

 

udbcrzy2

(891 posts)
20. Move along, nothing to see:)
Sun Jul 12, 2015, 07:17 PM
Jul 2015

I think it's really weird for them to say in the press release that they polled 1 million, but then it's not true, no where near true.

bigtree

(85,996 posts)
2. so, disputing the polling
Sun Jul 12, 2015, 03:41 AM
Jul 2015

...then an anti-Hillary rant. Pretty clear nothing other than a Sanders endorsement would suffice for you.

Unions endorse based on votes by elected leadership, not directly by members, but by the leaders they elect.

 

udbcrzy2

(891 posts)
5. I thought they polled their members
Sun Jul 12, 2015, 03:50 AM
Jul 2015

I was under the impression that they had polled 1 million or 1150 of their members according to their memos and press releases.

 

cherokeeprogressive

(24,853 posts)
11. I would be happy had they waited til all candidates announced.
Sun Jul 12, 2015, 11:07 AM
Jul 2015

Maybe even if they waited til every candidate had spoken at least one sentence in the first debate.

Ford_Prefect

(7,895 posts)
6. The text of the endorsement is sadly rife with propaganda and unproven assertions.
Sun Jul 12, 2015, 05:59 AM
Jul 2015

While there may be a majority of AFT members in favor of HRC the evidence presented looks more like a push poll than genuine research. I know teaching members of AFT who have not specified interest in HRC over others at this point and who will no doubt be complaining to AFT head office over this tactic of pre-approval.

How could they decide on a candidate for the office now when there are still people who don't know who the potential candidates beyond HRC are or what their record, policy intentions and personal affiliations are? Via executive committee interviews with no participation or vetting by non-executive members? Horseshit!

Triangulation strikes again!

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,710 posts)
17. Why would a respected Democratic pollster
Sun Jul 12, 2015, 07:08 PM
Jul 2015

Why would a respected Democratic pollster whose clients include(d) Hubert Humphrey , Ted Kennedy and Bernie Sanders perpetrate a fraud on the public?

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,710 posts)
22. I can not ascribe nefarious motives to individuals without sufficient evidence.
Sun Jul 12, 2015, 07:21 PM
Jul 2015

I can not ascribe nefarious motives to individuals without sufficient evidence. That would make me prejudiced.



I would add anybody is free to commission a poll of their own that will either validate or invalidate the results.

99Forever

(14,524 posts)
23. Frankly sir, I don't give a damn what you do or don't ascribe to anyone.
Sun Jul 12, 2015, 07:26 PM
Jul 2015

Looks like duck, quacks like a duck, waddles like duck, and has feathers on it's ass?

It's most likely a duck.

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,710 posts)
24. That's fine that you don't care what I think. Anne Frank would think highly of me.
Sun Jul 12, 2015, 07:31 PM
Jul 2015
"I can not ascribe nefarious motives to individuals without sufficient evidence..."

-DemocratSinceBirth




“In spite of everything I still believe that people are really good at heart..."


-Anne Frank

LWolf

(46,179 posts)
9. My colleagues
Sun Jul 12, 2015, 10:35 AM
Jul 2015

So far, when I talk to my colleagues around the country and here at home, there are some who are supporting Sanders. There are some who haven't heard of him beyond "that guy in Vermont." HRC is known. Those who have looked at the alternatives aren't all supporting this endorsement.

I'm hoping that the NEA will do better.

And, of course, we'll all vote for our own choice, regardless of who our association endorses.

 

Sheepshank

(12,504 posts)
10. So let me get this straight
Sun Jul 12, 2015, 10:44 AM
Jul 2015

Polling 1150 of 1,000,000 is a bad sampling. But as another post yesterday on DU attempts to point out polling 60 Mexican/hispanics of 33,000,000 is indicative of a Bernie surge in Latinos.

Ooops.

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
13. It's good to strive for accuracy.
Sun Jul 12, 2015, 11:50 AM
Jul 2015

In fact, I wrote that a sample size of 1150 meets established standards of adequacy in preference polling.
The problem with the polling is that it is directed at a rapidly changing situation and therefore cannot be expected to accurately establish the trend line of opinion on the subject. Since the trend is obviously going AGAINST HRC, it is an ethical lapse to use that snapshot as a basis for claiming membership support.

Sorry it wasn't clear enough for you.

Le Taz Hot

(22,271 posts)
12. This explains it perfectly
Sun Jul 12, 2015, 11:26 AM
Jul 2015

The Clinton camp is getting nervous. The Whisper Campaign, the surrogates, none of it is working. Hillary remains stagnant, or worse, and Bernie's popularity is on a steep upward trajectory. They're worried so they get one of "their" guys who happens to be head of a labor union to endorse Hillary WAY TOO EARLY. Funny thing happened on the way to the union-endorsement hijacking -- the rank-and-file aren't going along. The rank-and-file are pissed and there is going to be a huge backlash. The amazing thing is? They don't even see it coming. The Reality-Based Beltway Insiders are, as is so often the case, clueless as to what is happening out here.

 

HooptieWagon

(17,064 posts)
29. Exactly.
Sun Jul 12, 2015, 07:50 PM
Jul 2015

In their arrogance, they don't think people are watching, and think they can pull a fast one.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»On AFT polling behind Cli...