The cellphone brigade and why the polls may be wrong (Joe Trippi)

[truthpusher]

• October 12, 2004 | 3:24 p.m. ET

The cellphone brigade and why the polls may be wrong (Joe Trippi)

In the last few weeks, I have been on college and high school campuses all over the country—from the University of Miami for the first Presidential debate, to the two high schools I’m visiting today in Ann Arbor, Michigan. I keep seeing the same thing— young people energized in a way that I have not seen in my entire 30 years of politics.

Yet most of the polling I have seen doe not reflect any expectation of a higher turnout than usual among these younger voters. I suspect that cell phones are the reason for this.

Pollsters have not come up with an effective means to conduct or even contact survey respondents who only use cell phones. But think of the explosive growth in cell phone usage (particularly among the young) over the past four years.

So if we are seeing, as I think we are, an increase in energy and commitment to vote among young people than at any other time in my lifetime— and at the same time pollsters lack the ability to reach young people and measure this rise in civic participation— then we have the ingredients for a big surprise on election day.

I can’t wait for tomorrow night’s debate and if there is any further movement in the polls afterwards—but I am becoming convinced that John Kerry is doing far better than the pollsters are findings these days.

If Kerry wins in November, and the election is not as close as it now seems, the surprise may come at the hands of young people armed with cell phones the experts could not measure.

[e-mail]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5445086/

[txindy]

1. I concur

I've been saying this for weeks. This election isn't as close as predicted. Cell phone users are the hidden voters -- and they're feeling a strong, sudden draft. ;)

[northzax]

4. and polls cover 'likely' voters

usually people who voted last time. There are 10,000,000 people who cou;dn't vote last time who may this time.

it's all about turnout, folks,

[RoundRockD]

2. He's right. Both of my sons are eligible to vote for the first time.

They both use cell phones and they are both voting for Kerry.

Also, we have caller ID and never answer the phone if we don't know who is calling.

[Debi]

3. Didn't Michael Moore already say this?

eom

[benito]

5. as well as

People like me. 33 years old and never registered to vote until 2 weeks ago. My vote may not swing my state (Louisiana), but it will count in Kerry's favor and that's all I want.

BUSH HAS TO GO!

[Bandit]

14. I have two sons in your age group

Both are thirty four..twins and they both only have cell phones and I am fairly certain they will vote this year. I think one of them is going to vote Republican though..and he is not as likely to vote as the other is. I think a lot of younger people just don't see the benefit in having both a cell phone and a land line phone. Extra household expense. Everyone has a cell phone this day and age and if they have to give up one or the other it will be the land line that goes. Not just 18-24 year olds fit this bill.

[Jackpine Radical]

19. Not that I would suggest anything, but

he would be even less likely to vote if he spends Nov 2 bound & gagged in your closet. It's for his own good, you know. He'll eventually forgive you.

[yellowcanine]

6. Shades of the 1948 Gallup polling fiasco - supposedly one of the reasons

for the faulty polls in 1948 was that Gallup did not account for the fact that many low income people (who went for Harry in a big way) still did not have telephones.

[depakid]

7. Just one of many reasons why there's selection bias

Others won't answer because of caller ID, or the screen their calls or you name it. The bottom line is that historically, the non-responders have been different than the responders, and typically more conservative.

[ArkDem]

10. The non-responders are typically more conservative?

[Gman]

8. Rest assured the Bush campaign knows this too

which is why they're fighting like they're 10 points behind. Of course you always do that in a campaign, but they know they just might be 10 points behind.

[Snivi Yllom]

9. Interesting theory, but according to Zogby * is winning the 18-29 vote

So the October surprise could be the unsurveyed 18-29 year olds actually giveing * a bump out of nowhere.

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=882
President Gaining Momentum Among Younger Voters (47%-38%)

"Bush seems to be making gains among 18-29 year olds. He now leads among them -- something that has not happened all year until now. I am watching closely to see if that continues."

Trippi may or not be right, but his assumption is based on these young voters not getting polled. Zogby claims to be able to poll these people.

Nov 3rd will provide answers.

[MissouriTeacher]

11. I think 18-29 is too wide a range.

If you really want the 'young vote' I think you should measure approximately the ages of 18-24. Past age 24, people are more likely to be out of school, married, involved in their careers and therefore more likely to become conservative. I think those 26-29 year olds may have thrown that sample off.

[DancingBear]

12. I believe even Zogby didn't believe this

He mentioned that this was way out of the norm - hence his comments about "watching closely."

Last reports I had heard prior to this was somewhere around 59-30 in favor of Kerry in that age group.

[truthpusher]

17. 18-29 WITH a land line...

[nostamj]

13. i say this all the time

when dem friends get jittery about the 'polls'

20th century methodology/21st century election - doomed at the conceptual level and the practical.

[batchdem04]

15. Same here...

first time voter (24 years old) and been using a cell phone only for over two years now.

Also, there is probably a small segment using VOIP...

[newyawker99]

18. Hi batchdem04!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[CAcyclist]

16. The random samples may be even less random

I've been polled twice in the last year and I live in California - one was a LA Times poll and the other I don't remember the details on.

If these polls were truly random, I would be as likely to be be polled as to win a big prize in the lottery.