Monday, May 07, 2007
|
|
Why I'm Skeptical of that NH Poll
|
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
3:26 PM
|
|
MyManMitt writes:
So the latest poll out of New Hampshire shows Romney with his first significant lead over McCain and Rudy. Even John Podhoretz had to concede that Romney helped himself in the debate.
Philip Klein of AmSpecBlog adds:
In a poll of New Hampshire Republicans, Mitt Romney has opened up a solid lead. This bolsters the view of Romney supporters who argue that once people get to know him more, and his money and organization work their magic, he'll win.
So why am I skeptical???
First, my sources in New Hampshire tell me that Romney is doing very well in New Hampshire -- especially in Rockingham County -- but that he does not have a third of the vote. Unlike Rudy (who has handlers and an entourage in states like New Hampshire and Iowa), Romney has done the Lincoln Day dinner circuit -- and is very accessible. (Slightly off topic, Krusty Konservative reports that Tommy Thompson actually had more attendee's at a recent rally in Iowa than Rudy did!).
By the way, it certainly does not help Romney to create falsely high expectations in New Hampshire. In fact, he should be knocking this story down (even if it is true).
Second, Survey USA uses auto-dialing technology. Essentially, this means they are unable to do very who they are talking to (and if they are talking to undecided voters).
Romney did very well in the debate, but it was seen by a total of like 1.5 million people on MSNBC. The idea that this one cable TV performance moved the numbers (to this degree) is wishful thinking.
Lastly -- and importantly -- it really inconsistent with the last 3 surveys conducted and released in New Hampshire.
|
|
Romney's numbers seem to be improving in the Survey USA CA poll also. Survey USA is a very reputable pollster and is probably second to Mason-Dixon in accuracy on state polling.
Romney seems to be showing strength in state polling but his national polls are appear to be stimied. One reason is that Survey USA polls likely voters, while many of the national polls poll adults.
So far this year Survay USA has not had a Romney bias. Romney normally does not do that well in thier polls.
A second more important reason maybe that the quiet, expensive organization that Romney is putting in place in key states is starting to impact the state polls. That effect would not show up much in the national polls of adults. |
|
Yes, only 1.5 million people saw the debates, but what else, what else are you missing in your analysis?
Anyone watching the NEWS or reading a PAPER for the next two days heard Romney declared the victor and saw out-takes of his best answers.
So actually, millions saw Romney at only his best, which is actually better for Romney than if they had seen the actual debate.
Try not to think in such a linear fashion.
So why is Romney polling better in NH than nationally? Face it, NH isn't famous for a lot of things, but it is famous for picking eventual Presidents. They take pride in that and they are ENGAGED.
Most of America watched "I Love Lucy" re-runs rather than those debates. They aren't engaged yet. NH is and that's why Romney jumped in their polling.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS THIS:
Every time people finally get to hear Romney and see who he is, he impresses. He won CPAC for a reason. He won that debate for a reason. He will win the Presidency for a reason. |
|
I am also skeptical of polls ...
and I am skeptical of those who are skeptical of polls. |
|
Everybody has been skeptical of Romney since day one. Everytime he wins a straw poll or every time he increases in the poll, (which he is the only candidate that continues consistnetly to be moving up) there is a reason to describe it away. That is fine, because he consistently seems to defy the skeptics by continuing to do well. He is impressive, no doubt about it. He didn't have half what Rudy and McCain had going for them and if he continues to move up, he will well deserve to be president.
Sure, he has an uphill battle, but he appears to be up to it. If anybody can do the impossible, it is romney. |
|
Matt,
You just edited your post in a couple of places without acknowledging that you did so.
I realize that after you publish a post, you sometimes like to add a link, or add an additional thought to the post---and that's perfectly legitimate---but do it the honest way that Hugh, Dean, and Mary Katharine do it, by informing people that it constitutes an "Edit" or "Update," or "Correction."
Blogging should be transparent---there's no reason to be clever or sneaky about editing, Matt. |
|
Survey USA has not been a Romney friendly poll. I suspect that Romney does have natural upward movement. It may be that this poll overstates the movement a little (we will see with additional polls). I would like to see an ARG poll. In this same poll Thompson has 11 % so Romney and Thompson seem to be taking votes from McCain and Rudy.
I doubt if the debate is the cause of the movement. I suspect that Romney is starting to move in states where he is campaigning effectively. He is second in NV. When he starts making a big move in SC and FL I will be really impressed.
This is really off of the wall, but maybe the PBS special is helping Romney instead of hurting him.
Some will say that NH is his back yard, but I would note that NY is also very close to NH. It is Rudy's back yard also.
One other note. Thompson has a big down day on TradeSports. Guiliani is also having a bad day. The odds are fairly fluid but these moves are not random. The Thompson market tends to be a thin market so any big shift will shift the odds a lot. |
|
|
For a Mitt supporter like me, the New Hampshire polls have me cautiously optimistic. It is generally good not to overplay your hand though, so I don't mind some trying to moderate the enthusiasm out there. He will still have to make hard and steady gains as he moves up the ladder. I am confident he can do it. |
|
|
I'm not sure I agree with the comment that the MSNBC anemic viewership did not have an effect on Romney's polls in NH. Remember that Romney was already polling well in NH and this latest poll could very well be attributed to a post debate bump. I think the bump has more factors than the MSNBC debate. First Leno, then a good debate performance, then a blogstorm and even some MSM praise regarding his good performance all come together in a trifecta that could very well explain the positive polls. But as with many poll bumps, they tend to fade. So, I agree with the assessment that this should not be over-emphasised. |
|
Matt,
I think the real reason you're "skeptical" of the polling numbers is because they don't advance the cause of your candidate, John McCain.
But below is what you actually wrote about a recent single poll which favored McCain, even though IT differed from previous polls---in fact, you went as far as to characterize the SINGLE poll as "a signifigant upward trend."
****************
"This new Cook Poll shows Rudy is leading McCain by 7 points. While 7 points is still significant, just one month ago, Rudy was up by 17 points. McCain appears to be showing a significant upward trend.
According to pollster.com:
That result represents a drop in Guiliani's lead over McCain from 17 points (34% to 17%) a month ago (among 290 Republicans), a decline that looks right on the edge of statistical significance given the relatively small sample sizes."
****************
So, to summarize, when there's a SINGLE poll (with a small sampling, by the way) showing McCain improving his numbers, you characterize it as "a signifigant upward trend."
Yet when there's a single poll showing Mitt Romney improving his numbers, you're armed with several explanations for why the numbers shouldn't be believed.
It sounds like you're just tossing a coin in the air and saying, "Heads, McCain wins, and tails, McCain's opponents lose !" |
|
It was only a matter of time until that poll showed up on the front blog page.
Romney helped himself much more with his 7 minutes on the Tonight show than he did with the debate. I don't know of anyone who watched the debate who was not already closely watching the race. |
|
|
|