Remembering Gallup's Wacky 2000 Tracking Poll

Everyone remembers the 2000 presidential election with its excruciating post-election vote counting controversy in Florida and the Supreme Court decision that awarded the presidency to George W. Bush. But how many people remember the Gallup 2000 election tracking poll? I'm sure the Gallup folks would like us to forget it, but in light of the controversy over Gallup's recent poll for USA Today that showed a big discrepancy between registered and likely voters, it's worth recalling just how well Gallup's likely voter screen performed in the weeks leading up to the 2000 election.

As Robert Erikson of Columbia University has demonstrated, Gallup's likely voter screen had the effect of producing tremendous volatility in the results of their daily tracking poll. The volatility was due less to variation in the preferences of registered voters than to differences in which voters were identified as likely to vote.

Just how volatile where Gallup's results? Here are a few examples:

On August 8 Gallup had Bush 2 points ahead of Gore. Six days later, on August 13 they had Bush 16 points ahead. But one week later, on August 20, they had Gore back ahead by one.

The craziness didn't end with the nominating conventions either. On September 21 Gallup had Bush ahead of Gore by 10 points. Four days later, on September 25, Gore was back in the lead by 3. Then on October 5 Gallup had Bush ahead by 11. The next day, on October 6, his lead was down to one, and one day later, on October 7, Gore was ahead by 7.

Here's my favorite. On October 24 Gallup had Gore ahead of Bush by one point. Three days later, on October 27, they had Bush ahead by 13.

In their final pre-election poll Gallup gave Bush a 2 point lead--not too bad since Gore won the popular vote by less than a point. But two days earlier, Gallup had Bush ahead by 5.

No other poll during the 2000 campaign showed anything like the volatility of the Gallup tracking poll and so far Gallup's 2008 tracking poll has shown nothing like the volatility of their 2000 tracking poll. That's probably because they haven't started to apply their likely voter screen to the tracking poll. So here's some friendly advice to the folks at Gallup: Don't, at least not until the last few days before the election when it might actually work.

Comments

[BrickSykes]

Why couldn't this be just a basic part of the "Biggest Con of the Century?"

Think about it: How about if ALL the 'bona fide' Poll Groups were as much under the control of Big Business as nearly everything in the US Government? If any entity wanted to "Catapult the Propaganda" that John McCain's Candidacy was in any way even close to the Promise of Obama's, how would our "Election Machinery" cause that to happen? Well, they could create the "Illusion" that both candidates were alternately 'neck-and-neck' by publishing these (possibly) Bogus 'Poll' Stats. How would the American Public know, for certain, that the figures produced were in fact the result of a True Bona Fide Survey? Well, WE WOULDN'T! They expect us to believe them, just like George Bush and Dick Cheney expected us to believe them!

How 'bout if America hasn't had an Honest Election since President Carter's? I mean, does anybody actually believe that America's Business Community is going to Trust the American Voter to deliver them a "Business Friendly" leader every time? NO! They cannot pin their Profits on the "Whim of the People!"

I feel the Theft of 2000, the Diebold, ES&S, Florida & Jeb Bush, were simply the "Guarantee Factor" that American Business has come to depend on, and they're not likely to change, at least if left to their own devices.

You thoughts are probably truer that most Americans are prepared to Believe!

Brick

[Republicnotademocracy]

Well Bricky, what do you say about AOL's weekly straw poll that shows McCain consistently trouncing Obama (the whole map is red, except for DC)? Are the respondents, in the hundreds of thousands (compared to the measly few thousand carefully selected LAND-LINE poll respondees of the "professionals") all to be treated as an aberation occurring every week?

You're not making sense on this one, pal!

[shades3]

How accurate the VOTING MACHINES are is far more important than any polling data.

DIEBOLD has been re-named PREMIER VOTING SYSTEMS, with no modifications having been made to the possibility of hacking the system.

Polls are one step up from a crystal ball.

The VOTING SYSTEMS make the difference between whether your vote is counted, as you meant to cast it, or whether it is STOLEN.

[Mike4Obama]

Bottom line is, don't get excited about one poll. You've got to graph it and trend it to see what is happening.. For instance, in Gallup Tracking, McCain in the last 3 weeks has yet to break the 44% for registered voters. Obama hasn't dipped below 44%, only hitting this mark twice, but has hit as high as 49% back on the 27th of July.

Here's a few averages.

Gallup tracking for week of 18 Jul-24 Jul. Obama 45.42 McCain 42.42
Gallup tracking for week of 25 Jul-31 Jul. Obama 47.16 McCain 41.33
Gallup tracking for week of 01 Aug-07 Aug. Obama 45.66 McCain 43.5

Obama spiked during end of his Mid-East-Euro Tour. This was probably a combination of McCain visiting fudge and sausage houses and Obama's non stop news coverage. It seems things have settled down but Obama has gained a bit but McCain has also managed to gain a bit more. Possibly all the tabloid like campaign commercials McCain has chosen to won has fired up the Jerry Springer base he's relying on.

Here's the link to Gallup.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/109339/Gallup-Daily-Preferences-Stable-Obama.aspx

Happy Friday.

[holyhandgrenaid]

Not that national polls actually mean anything anyway, seeing as the President isn't voted by popular vote ya know.....

You should only bother with state polls and the analyses thereof at fivethirtyeight

[CanadianAmerican]

If you haven't already read it, you might find this of interest: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/on-likely-voters-and-long-tail.html

[sufi66]

Method determines everything. How information is gathered determines the result.

"How" is also determined by language which is usually imprecise.

So polls are good entertainment but that's all they are.

[GuyFawkes]

So polls in early August are meaningless? Thanks.

[gevan]

They are meningful in regard to the August voting.

[2008debate]

Remember 2004?

Gallup showed Bush winning by 2%, which was pretty accurate since Bush won by 3%.