Former polling house staffer: The data says we are winning, even though the media says we aren't

[Fiendish Thingy]

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/3/10/2228469/-The-data-says-we-are-winning-even-though-the-media-says-we-are-not?utm_campaign=trending

In addition, polling is getting sloppier and much less rigorous. Back when I was more involved with the stuff, we were not allowed to analyze cross tabs with a low number of respondents because the margin of error in doing this is so high. Now, Nate Cohn and others are writing headlines for voter segments predicating national outcomes for voting groups based on the answers of a few hundred respondents (just 205 non white no college age votes in the poll that has driven so much coverage). It is mind blowing to me that the pollster, Siena College, is allowing this to happen. The result? 15 point plus swings in the responses of demographic groups from poll to poll (which is what happens when you have small sample sizes and a margin of error over 10%). This crosstab data that the Times and others (like Axelrod) are basing predictions that the voter electorate is making massive changes is basically worthless. This is why there is so much inconsistency in the polls.

Finally, pollsters are increasingly weighting responses to get the results they want. The Times poll — for some reason — weighted the voter poll to make it go from a +1% Democratic electorate to a +3% GOP electorate. The electorate in 2020 was +1% Dem and the trend is that the electorate is getting more Democratic and not less. The Times did not explain why they did this but presumably believe that the Trump electorate will increase from past historic levels of turnout (in 2020 and 2016). It’s a massive assumption that was made somewhat casually. Unfortunately, this kind of weighting to result seems to be happening more and more as pollsters try to work with models and responses they don’t view as ideal or that correspond to the results they want or believe is correct.

In addition, while it has gotten more expensive to do good polling, it has gotten cheaper to do bad polls (via robocalls, email, internet response). Polling has also now become widely accessible (whereas in the past it was a specialized field). You or I could do a very bad poll right now via existing online tools. The margin of error for polls done cheaply (and with small samples) is huge and not predictive. Unfortunately, the prominence of the polling averages — a valid way to reduce margin of error when the average was of a lot of high quality polls — and the low cost and availability of bad polling has meant that political actors can and are flooding the polling averages with bad polls designed to support their candidate (and the narrative they are pushing to further that support). You just need to create a seemingly credible group name for the pollster and you are in, like this one from “Mainstream Research” that polled only 250 respondents to make claims about North Carolina. It’s absurd.

So, polling, while another point of data, is a much diminished tool and is no longer nearly as predictive of actual electoral outcomes as it was in the past. .

It’s a great, informative article, and I highly recommend everyone read the whole thing.

[lefthandedskyhook]

1. ABC bought off the best poll aggregator

Now he mostly plays poker it seems

[Fiendish Thingy]

2. They didn't buy him off, they fired him

Nate allowed the 538 aggregate modeller to be manipulated by the type of deeply flawed cheap polls described in the excerpt I posted.

He acknowledged the average had been manipulated, and shrugged and said “Dems could have done their own shitty polls, but chose not to”.

Not exactly a man of integrity.

[PortTack]

5. Nate should have stuck to gambling odds..sports and horses.

[Think. Again.]

3. K&R

[senseandsensibility]

4. K and R

Great post, informative read.

[thenelm1]

6. Must maintain the "horse race" for ratings & clicks. n/t

[Hope22]

7. Or...Make a steal on paper look plausible.....

[bucolic_frolic]

8. "Feel good" polls for both sides keeps the eyeballs buzzed and the money rolling in!

[Warpy]

9. Well, hooray for the media, they'll scare people off that comfy couch

and out in the cold to vote if the stakes are high enough and I think keeping that thing away from government would qualify.

I'm not at all bothered by misleading headlines and buried ledes in this case.

The more people who are afraid of him and sick to death of his fan club, the better.

[pansypoo53219]

10. they NEED a race for RATINGS.

[Cha]

11. Bookmarking! TY