CBS Poll: Addition by Subtraction
posted at 10:56 am on February 26, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
CBS and the New York Times have a new poll out that looks at the Democratic primary race and at the general election. In the former, it uses a rather small sample, but in the latter the sample gets weighted — as usual — in favor of Democratic voters. Barack Obama has taken a lead in the national numbers for the primary, not exactly breaking news:
A new CBS News/New York Times poll finds Barack Obama with a 16-point lead over rival Hillary Clinton among Democratic primary voters nationwide.
Obama, coming off 11 straight primary and caucus victories, had the support of 54 percent of Democratic primary voters nationally. Clinton had 38 percent support.
In a CBS News poll taken three weeks ago, shortly before Super Tuesday, Obama and Clinton were tied at 41 percent. Clinton led by 15 points nationally in January.
The former first lady has lost her advantage among women, according to the poll: The two leading Democrats now have even levels of support among female primary voters.
How did CBS reach this conclusion? They polled 427 Democratic voters. That isn’t an exceptionally strong sample, and it produces a conclusion that is a likely outlier. Gallup, AP, and Rasmussen all show Obama leading but in a much closer race.
The problems increase when the poll includes Republicans. They show Obama beating John McCain by twelve points, 50-38. However, the sampling and weighting explains the strange notion that John McCain would only get 38% of a general election vote. The sample of 1152 respondents comprises 358 Republican voters, 420 Democrats, and 337 independents. Here’s how they weight the sample:
Democrats - 419
Republicans - 318
Independents - 325
Get the math? They deducted 40 Republicans, 12 independents, and a grand total of 1 Democrat for their weighted sample. The original configuration would have made Democrats 37.6% of the sample, and Republicans 32% - almost exactly how Rasmussen
breaks out party affiliation. Instead, the weighting makes Democrats 39.5% of the sample, and Republicans just a shade under 30%.
If your butcher did this, you’d demand that he take his thumb off the scale. These results are completely useless, and once again CBS and the New York Times report more on their own credibility than on the mood of the electorate.
Cross-posted at Captain’s Quarters.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Great stuff! I had to wonder at the end numbers after reading all the issue specific results. Pretty much every one had McCain highly favored over Obama. I’m sorta surprised they published the issues questions at all…..
funky chicken on February 26, 2008 at 10:59 AM
I hate math.
Scoreboard44 on February 26, 2008 at 11:03 AM
Sooo…
I’m not supposed to believe the NYT’s and CBS?
Scoreboard44 on February 26, 2008 at 11:03 AM
Someone else posted the questions they asked. Some were along the lines of “Which candidate makes you believe in ‘hope’ and ‘change’?” Yup, another great poll.
Rational Thought on February 26, 2008 at 11:05 AM
By the way..
Welcome aboard Captain.
Scoreboard44 on February 26, 2008 at 11:05 AM
Thanks Captain. I loathe the polls. All a pollster has to do to prove his credibility is narrow the findings the closer and closer the actual election comes. They could report a 60-40 split for months (and influence opinions), as long as the last few polls reflect the reality of say 52-48, and they have their butts covered. Biggest scam since Fast Eddie factored his inventory.
Limerick on February 26, 2008 at 11:06 AM
The thing that I am laughing about is less than a few months ago on virtually every MSM news station, including PMSNBC and C the BS, Shillary was the Chosen One, destined to return to the White House in triumph.
That was until B.O. mania kicked into overdrive.
Now, the same news outlets who were extolling on her virtues are now kicking her in the pants every chance they get.
I am just amazed at this point that you don’t have Bubba Billy out there foaming at the mouth over the treatment Shillary is getting.
But then again, for all anyone knows, she has him bound and gagged in some bunker in the middle of the Nevada desert to prevent him from nuking what little is left of her campaign.
pilamaye on February 26, 2008 at 11:06 AM
These distortions matter because the psyche of the American sheeple is to want to be with the winner, so the more polling says Obamessiah is the winner, the more undecideds will flock to him, thereby making him the winner.
All hail McCain-Feingold for giving the press the power to pick a president!
JustTruth101 on February 26, 2008 at 11:07 AM
Strange, because I saw three polls that had McCain leading yesterday. They were the first national polls since the smear was released. What made me even more red-faced was that Fox used this nonsense poll yesterday without sourcing any others. Finally , they came out with their own Fox/Dynamic poll that had Mac right there. Please keep an eye on this captain, because the NYT will have to be silent for a while with its opt-ed’s so the polling will be their new vehicle of slime.
THE CHOSEN ONE on February 26, 2008 at 11:11 AM
JustTruth101 on February 26, 2008 at 11:07 AM
Smartest guy in the room.
THE CHOSEN ONE on February 26, 2008 at 11:12 AM
Will we ever see the day where these supposedly public or academic polls release the raw data so ordinary folks can fiddle with it? That’s where the real important stuff is, not this “who’s up/who’s down” crap.
SocklessJoe on February 26, 2008 at 11:16 AM
The polls are the news; and have been for years now. Instead of actual reporting, ya know.
lorien1973 on February 26, 2008 at 11:17 AM
And when McCain wins they then can scream “Diebold” and again argue that we dont need to screen voters as it disinfranchises minorities. And the NY Times and CBS play along with the game.
William Amos on February 26, 2008 at 11:22 AM
Heck, almost looks like they hired the Star Tribune pollster. The Red Star & Sickle has a long history of oversampling Dems right up until the election, which always shows a much better Republican showing than they predicted.
In 2004 they were called on it, and their (ridiculous) response? They claim their polling was accurate, but there is a consistant last minute swing- sometimes in the space of a day- towards Republicans. Yet they still refused to release their methodology. Absolutely shameful.
Hollowpoint on February 26, 2008 at 11:23 AM
Media polls are mathematical garbage and are intended to influence rather than inform. And who in their right mind would believe anything emanating from the New York Times . . . just more leftist propaganda.
rplat on February 26, 2008 at 11:23 AM
Even if CBS and the NYT were objective news outlets and they didn’t skew the numbers…… Aren’t these polls useless anyway?
We are eight months away from the general election. The running mates will matter to a degree (Obama’s to add gravitas to his lack of experience, McCain’s to add some charisma and youth to the AARP ticket). So too will world events including whatever happens in the GWOT. Obama’s greatest strength lies in domestic policies but one terrorist event could well put him in a double digit deficit with the adults. Conversely, if all continues to go well in the GWOT, McCain’s achilles heel among conservatives is his far-left domestic positions including amnesty, higher taxes, and bigger government.
So, what value do these early polls really have in the outcome of the general election?
highhopes on February 26, 2008 at 11:25 AM
The reverse of the method (subtraction reached by a curious form of addition) that the classic purely-mechanical early calculator, the CURTA, used.
(Made modestly famous in the William Gibson sci-fi novel “Pattern Recognition”.)
Maybe CBS is tallying on these antique devices?
profitsbeard on February 26, 2008 at 11:26 AM
I find it amazing that people put so much stock in polls, especially from organizations like CBS. Republicans candidates always underpoll for some reason… just look at the 1984 polls. Reagan and Mondull were in a “close race” according to the pollsters and on election night Reagan got 525 electoral college points.
Reaganite84 on February 26, 2008 at 11:27 AM
Good catch, Captain Ed!
I really need to get more of my friends to read Hot Air. The gloomy Republican mood will ensure our defeat, and the truth is that it is entirely manufactured by the MSM.
joewm315 on February 26, 2008 at 11:27 AM
Seriously. Has there been any poll in this election cycle that has accurately predicted the result?
I always say that if you torture the numbers enough, they’ll confess to anything.
BacaDog on February 26, 2008 at 11:33 AM
I NEVER participate in pools. I tell them I’m not going to waste my time so they can play their numbers games. It killed me when Chris Matthews ranted about white racism because he felt the polls didn’t justify the actual election results.
snaggletoothie on February 26, 2008 at 11:37 AM
Well, well, well, things are getting interestinger:
From WND:
Sen. John McCain, the presumptive GOP nominee for president, has been linked by documents and testimony to another alleged case of what critics are calling influence peddling, this time involving a minority broadcaster in Pittsburgh.
The New York Times last week published a major, controversial expose that insinuated McCain had a romantic relationship with telecommunications lobbyist Vicki Iseman, whose clients had a large stake in decisions made by the Senate Commerce Committeee McCain headed. The report, however, was denied by McCain and widely discredited for lack of evidence.
According to his own testimony, it wasn’t until he decided to give $4,000 in personal donations to Sen. John McCain, who at the time was chairman of the powerful Senate Commerce Committee, and another $40,000 to a then 30-year-old Iseman, that anything happened…..
McCain has legislated in favor of several other Iseman clients on issues dealing primarily with minority broadcast ownership. Here is the full list of her clients, who have contributed close to $100,000 to his campaigns, gleaned from Senate lobbying disclosure reports she and her firm have filed:
* Hispanic Broadcasting Inc.
* Telemundo Network Group Total Living Network Tulare County, Calif. * Univision Communications[snip]
In addition, Iseman has acquired a number of major Hispanic-owned businesses as clients. McCain sponsored a “comprehensive immigration reform” bill that would grant amnesty to millions of Hispanic immigrants living illegally in the U.S., even though Republicans in his border state of Arizona strenuously opposed the measure…..
—————————————–
The story is growing legs, MY FRIENDS.
stenwin77 on February 26, 2008 at 11:51 AM
Fuzzy wuzzy wasn’t a mathematician wuz he
Kini on February 26, 2008 at 11:51 AM
stenwin, another “lifelong conservative” for Obama.
I wish I could say I called him out first, but it was Limerick or somebody.
funky chicken on February 26, 2008 at 11:59 AM
Yeah, but we can’t overlook the fact that the sheeple buy into these manipulated polls. They stare at Katie on their boob tube and take it all in.
And since that is the reason CBS and the NYT manufacture this biased data, they are winning.
Informed voters: 15% of the public
Dumba$$ voters: 85% of the public
Therein lies the problem.
fogw on February 26, 2008 at 12:02 PM
And you are SO wrong. I just don’t think McCain is a good candidate against Osama. I will vote for McCain when he gets rid of JUAN HERNANDEZ, says he will pardon Ramos & Compeon, and puts a conservative on the ticket.
Just what will all of you do when this story (or future stories) about McCain and his antics turn out to be true? Cause they’re out there. THen it will be too late to get a GOOD candidate.
Just remember that not every one agrees with you (or me) and just because they do not agree with you, it doesn’t make them any less a conservative. I certainly don’t question your party affiliation or conservative values just because we don’t agree on John McCain. I think we agreed on Fred Thompson, though.
stenwin77 on February 26, 2008 at 12:04 PM
Unfortunately true. And they will only watch sound bites of debates that the media wishes to play. It is a big problem.
stenwin77 on February 26, 2008 at 12:07 PM
CBS / NY Times poll? I’d put more confidence in the Tooth Fairy / Easter Bunny poll. Giving the NY Times any credibility is a farce.
volsense on February 26, 2008 at 12:08 PM
stenwin77 on February 26, 2008 at 11:51 AM
Wow WND found more than the NYT. lol Oh, Stenny we know you hate Mav and have stated so numeorous times. Capt’n articles is just more bad news for you because you’ve been saying he can’t win. Guess what? All EVIDENCE contradicts you, your really starting to get nervous and are piecing together a collage of innuendo and maybees. lol Can’t wait to logon the day after the election to see you poopoo that the results must be fixed. lol
THE CHOSEN ONE on February 26, 2008 at 12:11 PM
Anyone wondering how the Obama’s found out this house was for sale in the first place?
According to this website:
Sitting on the Commission of Chicago Landmarks board, Michelle knew of a permit, waiting for review and approval to sell, for a designated Historical Georgian revival home built in 1910…
There follows a lot of details about how the property was subdivided so the Obamas could afford to buy it, all the permits needed, and so forth.
It goes on to say:
All that needed to be done, in the name of the doctor, on the Kenwood property was completed by March 2005, and the house was finally listed. Michelle Obama resigned her seat on the Chicago Commission on Landmarks at the same time.
But according to the Chicago Tribune, Barack Obama has a different, albeit fuzzy, explanation of how they heard of the property:
In the past, the two lots had been sold as a single estate. But in 2005, the owners listed the two parcels for sale separately.
Obama said his family’s real estate broker brought the house to his wife’s attention. He said he discussed the house with Rezko but isn’t sure how Rezko began pursuing the adjacent lot. But Obama raised the possibility that he was the first to bring the lot to Rezko’s attention.
“I don’t recall exactly what our conversations were or where I first learned, and I am not clear what the circumstances were where he made a decision that he was interested in the property,” Obama said.
“I may have mentioned to him the name of [a developer and] he may at that point have contacted that person. I’m not clear about that,” Obama said.
Riiiiighht. (Makes me think of Rush’s parody of Hillary where she says she can’t remember because her mind is jello).
Note also that Rezko agreed to pay for the fence around Obama’s house, but the company who built the fence was never paid because Rezko was indicted shortly thereafter.
One would think that Obama, who peddles the audacity of hope, would step in and pay the guy for his work on his property, who is no doubt hoping to be paid.
funky chicken on February 26, 2008 at 12:15 PM
You know what Mr. One, you won’t hear me crying the day after the election if mcCain wins. I HOPE TO GOD YOU ARE RIGHT. You are missing my point, I just think there were much better candidates. He will suck against Osama.
If you’re right, I’ll buy you a steak dinner. OK? It’s early, way too early, to be counting on the polls.
I’ve told you what McCain has to do to get my vote… I’ll keep my promise. Now relax… we really ARE onn the same side, we just see it differently.
stenwin77 on February 26, 2008 at 12:16 PM
I’m thinking so what? If the voters of this country are looking for a CBS poll to decide how to vote, then they’re stupid and they’ll get the government they deserve. Unfortunately, so will I.
orlandocajun on February 26, 2008 at 12:20 PM
Dewey Wins.
wildweasel on February 26, 2008 at 12:41 PM
…”once again CBS and the New York Times report more on their own credibility than on the mood of the electorate.”
Bingo! I’ve never heard it said so well.
I don’t put much credence in the pollz. It depends too much on how you define ‘credibility’ and who is manipulating it…
Christine on February 26, 2008 at 1:08 PM
Comparing apples to a brick: The media will continue to dig into McCain’s political history simply because he has one! Barry O belafonte is truly an empty suit with no relevant history of legislative accomplishment. There very well may be skeletons in McCain’s closet but I tend to think not. (as in any fight your first shot best be a good one, the NYT smear was extremely limp wristed and did more harm to their credibility than inflict damage to McCain) The biggest challenge the Republicans will face is how to expose the subliminal play on white guilt as a valid issue for a presidential election.
dmann on February 26, 2008 at 1:44 PM
Nice work Captain Ed… this is exactly the type of stuff that used to get my interest when I was blogging. Sadly there is just so much of this nonsense going on it would be tough to highlight all of them.
RightWinged on February 26, 2008 at 1:44 PM
This rewrite might better reflect your idea.
PrettyD_Vicious on February 26, 2008 at 2:33 PM