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

advertisement

-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

[lovethesinner]

In the end, TRUST may be the deciding issue in '08.

If the Clintons continue to act like neurotic parents who will do anything to get their child to behave, voters who aren't usually persuaded by being patronized may simply tell them "whatever" and jump ship.

But, this "All in the Family" approach to the Presidency was doomed from the beginning. Was anyone ever really going to buy Hillay's "Edith" to Bill's "Archie"?

Meathead in '08

[Wheelah]

The best spin Clinton and Edwards can come up with is "We're all tied up, statistica­lly." Gee, Thanks. Ever think the so-called unprecedented turn-out model might be onto something since all three candidates are aggressively courting first time voters? If past history is bucked and the under 35s actually turn out, Obama's gonna run away with Iowa. Otherwise, it'll be close. You don't need a pollster to tell you that.

[bIgTeX]

I have to agree that the deal is done. There is nothing anyone could say or do to make a difference at this point. My prediction is that the Dems will get either Obama, Clinton or Edwards. Yep print it we have a front pager.. :)-- and I bet the polls are right. I am an Indi and I am voting for Obama--never Clinton/Edwards.

[gregjones]

Now the Edwards are in attack mode. For Elizabeth Edwards to join her hubby with attacking statements of Michelle Obama is representative of desperation and 'old school politics' which is exactly what the Obama's are against and above doing. There are SOOOOOOO many things that the Obama's could bring out about both the Edwards and the Clintons..­...but they choose to stay above these tactics. The Obama's could stress how Hillary was actually a Republican in college. How Bill is a cheater and immoral. How Hillary won't allow her records to be opened which means they obviously have things to hide, although she repeatedly states she's been well vetted. How Bill will actually be running the White House, not Hillary. How Musharraf got the nuclear weaponry on the Clinton watch.....­.just to name a few re: the Clintons..­..As for the Edwards...­.he's a loser. He lost in his own state. Claims to be for the poor but has done NOTHING to help the poor. Thinks that since he went to Katrina he helped the poor. Gets $400 haircuts..­..and his hair looks no better than anyone else's which shows extreme waste. And Elizabeth is actually too sick to be first lady....(a­lthough we wish her well)...Wh­y would you put a first lady in the White House who could have major medical issues soon that would distract. But again.....­the Obama's are above stating these facts. Instead they are concentrating on what we all need......­the Re-Birth Of America !!! But you'd better believe, the Republicans will bring up these issues and a whole lot more. VOTE OBAMA !!!

[michaelfawlkes]

I wonder if our increased sensitivity to polls is in some way a consequence of having election tampering in 2000 and 2004. There are two days left, ignore the polls, just be patient and wait for the outcome.

[Jonni Rae]

Oh, please. Just can't accept that he is winning in Iowa? The DMR endorsed Hilary, so I don't think they would suddenly skew the polls for Obama, if anything it would be the other way around; He has worked and sweated for every vote in Iowa. He talks to people. He listens. His message and vision is one people can vote FOR for once. He has the endorsements of nine papers in Iowa, to Hilary's four. Could it be that he is winning? Yes!!! The DMR poll is known as the most relable one of all of them. Of course, it all comes down to who shows up on Caucus night,but I fail to see how CNN and other news outlets are so blatantly biased in trying to talk abot "other polls." when everyone knows this is the poll that really counts, two days away from the Caucus.

[bluesky49876]

It is a sad when newspapers start distorting the polls to disinform the public in an effort to influence the voting. Can any newspaper or tv outlet be trusted...­I think not.

[THISTLE]

To give importance to this farce in Iowa is
absurd. Why don't they just VOTE, go to a
polling place and VOTE. This is a charade
with people going into corners in a room,
what is this nursery school?
And the media making this into an "event"
of such importance. The history of the
people who win in Iowa - doesn't bode well,
and the ones who lose often become President -
same holds true for New Hampshire. Bill Clinton
did not win in New Hampshire, George Bush did
not win in New Hampshire - both won the
Presidency. The media has created all this
hype about IOWA - which is a state that does
NOT look like America. And does not have a
good history of picking WINNERS!

[ConcernAmerican]

This poll done by DMR is focused on independent voters and republicans who might caucus for a democratic candidate of their choosing. It would be between HRC and Edwards for the winner.

[Kane]

The spin from the Clinton & Edwards camps is making me dizzy.

[IMORPHEUS]

Isn't the Des Moine Register, the paper that endorsed Senator Clinton?

I guess the paper's judgment is sound when recommending candidates, but their polling data is 'untrustwo­rthy'...

I see we're starting the New Year, like the last year never ended...

[buzzygirl]

Everbody thinks the poll is wrong when it is not in their favor. Thursday can't come too soon.

There were polls yesterday and there are some out today showing Hillary in the lead. Yesterday some showed Edwards.

Neither one rejected those polls. I think the situation is very fluid, the register poll is good news for Obama, because it gives his campaign and its supporters a boost.

Just yesterday, some pundits thought he was dead in the water.

The voters will speak on Thursday, and I hope it is Obama.

[ChristopherLib]

The 45% of non Democrats voting in the Democratic primary is out of whack. Those are the kind of Independent numbers you can get in New Hampshire, but not Iowa. No poll will be perfect, who the hell knows what a caucus 2 days after New Years is going to result in, but this poll just seems fishing being out of line with all recent polls, and with that 45% Independen­t+Republic­an anomaly.

[cheforacle]

The final 2004 poll by the Des Moines Register was the most accurate of the major polls according to Markos Moulitsas at Daily Kos. He goes on to add whether that holds true this time is anybody's guess.