Question for all you Poll (T)humpers

[Indenturedebtor]

As I understand it non internet polls (which by their nature can't be random sample) are conducted by landline phone.

So wouldn't candidates who have a stronger youth base tend to be underestimated by standard polling methods?

When I was selling cars I almost never encountered a customer under 30 that had a landline. Really, almost never. And I did between 1-3 credit apps a day, 5-6 days a week, for almost 3 years. Also younger people are more likely to share a house with other young people... so even less representation if that house has a landline.

What's more right now he is the underdog... Underdogs motivate their sympathisers more to fight so long as the lead isn't too big. Perfect conditions to galvanize his supporters.

Based on this and the fact that Obama is pulling young people out of the woodwork AND polling well besides... I think Obamarama is gonna take the primaries and then the GE!

Hope so anyways ;)

[tives12]

1. I think the format of conducting these polls needs to change.

Even non-youths are moving towards just using cell phones.

[DJ13]

4. I think the format of conducting these polls needs to change.

I dont think that can happen as long as cell phone companies are allowed to charge their customers for incoming calls.

[Lucinda]

2. Where has he received an unusually large amount of young voters, other than Iowa?

[Indenturedebtor]

5. Here's one

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/27/politics/main3757059.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_3757059

I remember reading on the SC exit polls that he SMOKED her among young voters

[Lucinda]

6. He kicked fanny in SC but it was not an unusually large turnout of young voters.

14% - were 18-29
Nevada had 13%

[Barack_America]

7. And still, none of the polls were even CLOSE to predicting what actually happened. n/t

[Lucinda]

8. Not sure what you mean? We were discussing young voter turnouts...

[Barack_America]

9. The overall topic of the thread is the unreliability of polls,

with a high number of young voters being one of the reasons the polls are unreliable.

You said that there weren't a particularly high number of youth voters in SC and I pointed out that the polls were still way off.

Point being, I just don't really trust the polls all that much right now.

[thunder rising]

3. I certainly concur. But we are all about screwing the status quo, so let them figure it.

[andyrowe]

10. Would Scientologists refer to them as PT's?

[Stuckinthebush]

11. I think most polling firms weight for this

Pollsters are a very active and engaged group when it comes to methodology. Their accuracy is their business.

[TexasObserver]

12. You are correct. They're always polling the LAST election.

People act like polling is precise. It's far from it. A poll represents who the pollster has picked to sample, when and where they've picked to poll, and a variety of other things. Old people with landlines and no caller ID are easiest to poll. They're home. They answer every call. They're more likely to WANT to participate.

Young people are under the radar because of cell phones. They use caller ID, they don't answer callers they don't know, and they don't have time to chat with what is probably a push poller - who are far more frequent than real political polls.

Many polling agencies are compromised for the same reason major media are compromised: They slavishly serve their real economic bosses. Gallup, for example, "partners" with business all over the globe. Many of the pollsters work between elections on strictly business accounts. They're owned by whoever signs their check.

I don't put any confidence in any poll that I cannot actually read the extensive underlying data. You must know for yourself who they polled, how they were contacted, when they were contacted, how many were young, middle aged, old, how many were men, how many were women, how many black, white, hispanic, how many retired, how many in military venues, etc.

I'll give you a perfect example. New Hampshire. Everyone missed New Hampshire because they failed to predict that almost 60% of the Democratic vote would be women. Hillary had about an 8-10 point advantage among women. Obama had about the same margin among men. Women turned out 50% more voters than men in the Democratic primary, and that is the primary reason she won New Hampshire.

The real test of a poll is how closely it predicts the outcome, and that can't be known until the election has occurred.

[VolcanoJen]

13. Look at it this way... throw the polls in the garbage.

They are nothing but hype, something to keep the press occupied in between debates and actual elections.

I think the results so far this election year have proven the polling to be pretty useless. I think they're missing a key group: New, Unpredictable, Unpolled Voters. And those people can do anything. The pollsters don't know they exist and don't count on them to show up on election day.

You should be very encouraged by your theory about younger voters not having landlines and not being reached by pollsters. Drag their asses to the polls on election day, and we might just beat this system after all. :-)