Obama Rivals Say Des Moines Register Poll Can't Be Trusted

The campaigns of Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. John Edwards take issue with the Des Moines Register poll's unusual methodology, which predicts turnout at this year's Democratic caucus to be 40 percent Independents and five percent Republicans.

From Clinton's campaign:

The Des Moines Register poll adopts an unprecedented new turnout model for the caucuses, and its new poll is out of sync with the other polling done in the race.

When you look at Democrats who last time were 80% of the turnout, Hillary wins with that group by 6%, 33 to 27 for Obama and 25 for Edwards. And as David Yepsen points out, had their pollsters used the 2004 turnout model, Hillary would lead by 29 to 27, figures in line with the other polls.

The Des Moines Register Poll this time has 40% independent voters and 5% GOP voters in the poll when past independent participation has been 15% in 2000 and 19% in 2004, and the GOP has generally made up 1% of the vote. So they are depicting an unprecedented departure from historically established turnout patterns in the caucus. Under their model, only 55% of the caucus goers would be Democrats.

The other recent polls all show Hillary trending up and leading or within 1 point of the lead, and many show her moving up from a substantial deficit to tie and having the momentum in this race.

Insider Advantage, 12/28-12/19: Clinton 30, Edwards 29, Obama 22
Zogby, 12/27-12/30: Clinton 30, Edwards 26, Obama 26
Mason-Dixon, 12/26-12/18: Clinton 23, Edwards 24, Obama 22
Research 2000, 12/27-12/27: Clinton 28, Edwards 29, Obama 29
ARG, 12/26-12/28: Clinton 31, Edwards 24, Obama 24
Insider Advantage, 12/28-12/19: Clinton 30, Edwards 29, Obama 22

So we do not see this poll as accurately reflecting the trends we are seeing in other polls, on our nightly canvasses or in our own polls, and voters should understand this is a very close race, and that their participation on caucus night could make all of the difference.

From the Edwards campaign:

Is the poll accurate? There are good reasons to think it is NOT.

Story continues below

-The poll was conducted during the holiday AND over the weekend. There is plenty of evidence that either of these would make it more difficult to obtain a representative sample. The combination makes the problem of obtaining a valid sample GEOMETICALLY [sic] worse.

-The poll is at odds with history. The poll says that 60% of Democratic caucus participants will be first timers. Usually, the number of first-time caucus goers is no more than 20%.

-The poll also says that 45% of those at Democratic caucuses will be Independents or Republicans.

The poll is at odds with other polls. Other polls show a close race with other candidates leading.

-Yepsen himself highlights the fluidity of the results rather than the horserace.

What does the poll really say

-The poll says the race is close. With a margin of error of +/-5, any of the top 3 Democrats could be in any of the top 3 positions.

-The poll says the race is yet to be decided. 34% say they could change their minds, and 6% do not express a preference. This means 40% are yet to decide.

-As Yepsen points out, 21% of those in the 2004 entrance poll [said they had made their decisions in the last 3 days -- something this poll cannot capture.

Comments

[StanTheManic]

I live in DSM. Let me say a few things. Not many here caucus to "decide for the whole country." We do it because A). It's fun (really) and B). It's our civic duty. Also, no one trusts the DSM Register for ANYTHING! Also, yeah, it's cold here, but the only ASSHOLES you'll find outside are the midiots (that's idiots from the media) doing their talking head reports outside. There's an EXTENSIVE skywalk system in downtown DSM; you can get to and from everywhere w/out going outside. Also, I honestly believe DSM residents are screwing w/ telephone pollsters; after 4-5 calls PER DAY for TWO WEEKS, I know I'M screwing with them! I've been going to caucuses since 1980. Where else is a kid from DSM going to have a chance to meet Walter Cronkite, Hughes Rudd, Morton Dean, Connie Chung, Deborah Norville (woof!), Tom Brokaw, John Edwards, Jon Bon Jovi ...

[nunzia]

"Controvery swirls" only in the minds of msm who REALLY need something to fill the air time 24/7. The rest of us know that the damned race is so tight and that the polls, which don't include cell phones and people who aren't at home when they call, are simply not that accurate.

[Boadicea]

Facts:

1. THE DMR poll just before caucus has never been wrong about outcome. And they've always considered many factors other pollsters don't.

2. The CNN polster will not release info on that poll. Why? Because it employed methods devised to put Hillary on top. CNN is in Hillary's pocket.

3. The DMR endorsed Hillary. They're hardly going to try to give the edge to Obama.

4. Edwards - well, nevermind.

[RedRooster]

Using the reallocation methodology InsiderAdvantage used in 2004 – which correctly indicated a fairly comfortable win for John Kerry – our new poll reveals that, if the caucuses were held today, the reallocated final outcome would be:

Edwards: 41%
Clinton: 34%
Obama: 25%

http://www.southernpoliticalreport.com/storylink_1231_103.aspx

[thankulord13]

I have to say... I am personally getting tired of everyone thinking that Iowa is going to decide this election... Where the real power brokering is at will be Super Tuesday when the large states such as California will have their primaries. Iowa does give you momentum but to assume th some voters and how they vote in Iowa will sway me is almost insulting... This election is one that is out of the ordinary and I believe that all the rules from the past elections will be out the window. The reality is this you people will hopefully do your own research and cast your vote on whom ever has the best policies not who can get a studium full because Oprah or even Bill Clinton show up... Hopefully this time around we will be a little more wiser as a nation...

[degobah]

People, remember this...

1) Telephone polls do not include voters without a conventional "land-line" telephone.

2) From the polling data I have read, Obama has a great deal of support among the younger voters (18-34 years old) and this group is much less likely to have a conventional telephone; they use cell phones.

I believe that there are many Obama supporters who do not show up in polling data for this reason alone. Thus, look for an enormous turnout for Obama that totally baffles the pollsters in Iowa, and everywhere else. This is not an original idea, but I thought I'd point it out once again.

Virtually all of the young people I know (18-25 mostly) use cell phones exclusively and do NOT support Clinton it they're politically active at all. They are desperate for a change, not a political legacy, and this is Hillary's biggest problem. She represents a political dynasty. This will not fly in 2008.

Happy New Year to everyone. Go Obama.

Degobah from So Cal

[ConcernAmerican]

F*@K Obama! America will not have a President with a Muslim name, not counting he's black. All Guilliani has to say ISLAMIST TERRORIST, there goes Obama down the drain.

Fact of the matter is, Obama CANNOT win a single state down South.

A VOTE FOR OBAMA AKA EMPTY SUIT IS A VOTE FOR REPUBLICAN WHITEHOUSE!

Why do you think neocons are pushing for Obama and they're his biggest defender; they knew it is easy to swiftboat him. Obama won't even recognize his self after the Republican machine is through with him, grounded beef would look more appealing than him.

A lot of Obama supporters NEVER talk about the relationship of Obama with TONY REZKO, Obama made money on that deal at the expense of ILLINOIS TAXPAYERS...OBAMA IS YOUNG AND CORRUPT!

[WomanInOrangeSweater]

I'm so sick of these polls being trumpeted as news, I could just throttle something. We don't know what the candidates are saying, we don't know their voting records, but we know the poll numbers. And we argue about the validity of the poll numbers when we should be arguing about the validity of the candidates themselves.
I don't know how much these stupid ass polls cost, but I bet a person could do some good with the money saved if they'd just stop.

[Chandidevi]

I think the era of polls controlling elections, is gone. We are no longer influenced by the dubious claims of different pollsters. Polls are designed to INFLUENCE the election results, not predict. The ineptness of the Bush Administration (a la Karl Rove), at effectively and surreptiously controlling the end results is gone. We are wise to these jackasses. They can no longer pull the wool over our eyes. They blatantly stole the 2000 and 2004 elections; we know that. Now it is up to us to be vigilant at the polls and make sure the results are true. By the way, the video "From Freedom to Fascism" only plays halfway through; then, it stops. I read that Google removed it from their video webpage. What the hell???

[KindAndThoughtful]

To all the members of the Huffington Post community:

Have a safe and happy New Year!


http://verybestwebsites.blogspot.com/

[research]

Who are the top three candidates?

We don't really know.

Kucinich trounced everyone in the two largest polls for far: the DFA and the independents polls. 40% of Iowa voters are independent.
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters?pid=249126
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/29506
http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2007/08/5255_kucinich_wins_d.html

Great link on problems with modern phone polling.
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/cell_phones_and_political_surv.php
posted 12/31/2007 at 16:43:41

[FogBelter]

The only Poll that matters is the Vote itself.

The rest is just reading Tea Leaves.

The People of Iowa will turnout and Vote and make their decision known despite the Polls.

And frankly, if I was in Iowa and pollsters were climbing up my ass like a proctologist day in and day out ... I would just lie to them anyway.

Enough is enough.

[Taratrue]

ANOTHER poll we can argue about. More good news for Hillary.

A new 7News/Suffolk University poll finds that Hillary has opened up a double-digit lead over Obama in New Hampshire:

Clinton 36% (33% a month ago)
Obama 22% (26% a month ago)

Edwards 14% (15% a month ago)


Meanwhile, among Republicans, the poll shows that McCain jumped a healthy 12 points since last month to take the lead:

McCain 31% (19% last month)
Romney 25% (31% last month)

Giuliani 14% (17% last month)

Huckabee 9%


http://tpmelectioncentral.com/

[mudfiles]

I love it. Hillary and Obama were neck and neck for the past three months. But when a poll last week showed Hillary with a double digit lead, no one asked about the validity of the poll. Now, Obama gets a large lead, and everyone asks how real this poll is?

It's all bullshit people.

[snruB]

I don't know how the Clinton camp is complaining....didn't the DMR endorse her? If there was any way to slant the poll in Hillary's favour, it would've been done. Stop yer bitching and accept it