Fun with Gallup

[TomClash]

From Managing Editor Jeffrey Jones (my comments in italics):

Some consumers of the polls (including the Gallup Poll) have questioned poll results because party identification and other characteristics do not match the 2000 exit poll data. There are very good reasons why they may not match the exit poll data. Of course, it doesn't match any type of polling data from 2000 either, except Gallup's 2000 pre-election polls, which were wrong.

First, some treat the exit poll as a census. It is not a census, it is a survey based on sampling of voting precincts. There is a reason it is called an "exit poll" and not an "exit census." That's because it is a poll, and as such is subject to sampling variation and other polling errors just as any other poll would be. In fact, because exit polling relies on quota sampling (hand selection of survey spots according to population size and other factors), it has a higher degree of potential error than do the random samples on which telephone surveys are based. Why?Thus, there is no basis on which to believe the exit poll numbers are in any way more accurate than any other number you get from a poll. They are all estimates. So they are all pretty useless?The one advantage of the exit poll is that they know everyone they interview is a voter, while pre-election polls rely on models to determine who is likely to vote and who is not. However, that does not mean their estimates are necessarily better, and they are definitely not error-free estimates of the electorate as many treat them. In fact, when multiple exit polls existed in the past, they very routinely differed in their estimates of the vote as well as their estimates of the demographic characteristics of the electorate. so that means they are like -Gallup pre-election surveys? Even today the Los Angeles Times exit poll differs from the larger exit poll used by the networks.

Second, the exit poll measure of political party ID is fundamentally different from ours. We know that survey results can differ depending on how the data are collected. Our questions are read and responses obtained verbally over the phone. A land line and not a cell phone. Their responses are obtained in self-administered questionnaires that present the questions in a visual format. Like what the voter sees in a voting booth?Most survey research experts would be extremely cautious in comparing data obtained by a telephone interview versus that obtained in a self-administered paper-and-pencil questionnaire. Most surveys wouldn't survey 39% Republicans and 30% Democrats to manufacture a Bush leadThat is in addition to question wording differences in the party ID question that can also have an effect on the results. So, if exit polls are so bad, then what accounts for Gallup's miscue in 2000 when it polled about 6-8 points off the actual outcome?

Third, a lot has changed since 2000. In the post-9/11 environment, terrorism has become one of the chief problems for government to deal with. The Republican Party has a large perceptual advantage on the terrorism issue. To assume that everything is as it was four years ago is a very risky assumption. While it is possible that in the end things could change once again so that partisanship looks much like it did in 2000, that is by no means certain or even likely. How does all that mean more Republicans will turn out to vote than Democrats, who seem to be more motivated than ever to defeat Bush?