About that CBS/NYT poll …

posted at 10:31 am on April 19, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Yesterday, I noted the topline results of the CBS/NYT poll, which showed Barack Obama and Mitt Romney in a dead heat — but which didn’t supply the internals of the poll.  Today, CBS follows up on their polling with an interesting and more nuanced look at the gender gap, in which Romney trails badly with single women — but not so much with married women.  In fact, those working and stay-at-home moms give Romney the edge:

One headline out of our poll is the shrinking gender gap. A month ago, President Obama had an 11-point lead over Mitt Romney among women voters. Today’s poll, taken after Hillary Rosen’s comments and the subsequent firestorm, puts the gap at six points.

But as everyone should know (and despite all we hear about the “female” vote), women aren’t some monolithic group. Our poll reveals sharp differences in opinion, for example, between married and single women.

Among MARRIED women, Romney leads Obama 49 to 42 percent. But among SINGLE women, Obama has a huge lead over Romney, 62 to 34 percent.

In another piece of bad news for Obama, the poll shows that Romney has more upside than Obama — which is exactly what you’d expect to find with an incumbent.  More than a third of respondents (37%) don’t know enough about Romney to form an opinion of him, while only 13% say that about Obama. (Really?  After more than three years as President?)  That is why having a dead heat at this stage of the race is such bad news for Team Obama, along with a re-elect number in the mid-40s.  Romney has much more room to improve his standing than Obama does, and that’s why Team Obama has been so desperate to attack Romney on a personal basis.

Finally, though, we did get a look at the sample and its partisan split.  What I can say without reservation is that it’s better than CNN’s triple-facepalm performance in turning a one-point edge among respondents into a weighted twelve-point Obama lead, but that’s damning with faint praise.  Once again, the weighting in the poll (specifically on registered voters) shows a curious sense of modeling which makes this much less predictable than their original respondent composition would have been.

Here is the original D/R/I of the poll, compared with the weighted D/R/I:

  • General population: Original 33/29/38, Weighted 34/30/36
  • Registered voters: Original 34/31/36, Weighted 34/26/40

This isn’t as dramatic as the CNN poll, but it’s still odd.  The weighting on the general-population responses seems unnecessary but harmless.  However, on the RV side, the weighting looks less harmless.  A D+3 sample at 34/31/36 would be a rational predictive model for the upcoming election, somewhere between the 39/32/29 of the 2008 election and the 35/35/30 turnout in the 2010 midterms.  However, the 34/26/40 puts Republicans at a significantly lower level (six points!) than even the nadir of 2008 while extending the Democrat advantage to higher than that election’s D+7, while overstating the impact of independents.  Why choose that model when the original survey’s composition would have sufficed?  Needless to say, that’s the question CBS and the New York Times probably won’t be answering.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

Comment pages: 1 2

Enough with the polls already. They don’t mean that much until after the conventions anyway.

Ric on April 19, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Jiggering the numbers to show a dead heat. The MSM is working overtime….but the bumbling marxist moron is still toast.

He’ll have decades to reflect on (and make excuses for) his absolute failure as commander-in-cheif.

Jimmy Carter is dancing and laughing his ass off…..finally, a new joke of a failed (D) leader.

Tim_CA on April 19, 2012 at 11:39 AM

What’s worse? Being unemployed for a few months or being stuck with an unwanted child for 18 years?

angryed on April 19, 2012 at 11:21 AM

Your talking points are as shallow as a wading pool. In case you’re not aware, BC is as difficult to get as a bag of pot. And the crux of the issue is not your talking point.

Please explain to us all how OC was explicit in its exemption to these folks?

And how can a tenet of the Catholic faith can be jettisoned without legal regard for that religion’s canon law? Unless our Administration has no regard for that separation of church and state. Apparently selective legislation is OK.

VietVet_Dave on April 19, 2012 at 11:40 AM

@angryred:

“First Rule of RomneyAir: If a poll comes out that says something you don’t like, the poll must be biased.”

In other words:

“I dunnna wantsa hear bout no fax and math an’ stuff like dat dere- ‘bammma is much more bettterer n’ stuff! You dont grees wit me, you ams a racisss and a poopoo dummy hedz!”

Yet again- Troll FAIL.

GrassMudHorsey on April 19, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Enough with the polls already. They don’t mean that much until after the conventions anyway.

Ric on April 19, 2012 at 11:38 AM

The numbers don’t mean much, but undermining the media is always useful.

forest on April 19, 2012 at 11:41 AM

@angryred:

What’s worse? Being unemployed for a few months or being stuck with an unwanted child for 18 years?

Sadly and obviously in your parents’ case, it was both.

As ever, Troll FAIL.

GrassMudHorsey on April 19, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Or…

Have an avenue by which a woman who got pregnant on accident can terminate the pregnancy. Hey wait a minute, that avenue exists.

Or…

Have a way of preventing the pregnancy in the first place by some sort of magic pill. Wait a minute that exists as well.

But that’s too easy. Instead let’s adopt the GOP way of pretending we live in 1951 where nobody had pre-marital sex and every baby born was loved and wanted.

angryed on April 19, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Yeah that poor little woman. She just never knew that whoring around could’ve led to pregnancy.

It’s called taken responsibility for your OWN ACTIONS! It’s very simple.

Or if your souless like yourself, at least have the decency to give birth and put the baby up for adoption! What a novel idea, let a family who can’t have kids adopt a baby instead of murdering the baby just b/c it’s “inconvenient” for some woman who wanted to have a good time.

LevinFan on April 19, 2012 at 11:43 AM

@angryred:

“How’s that “truth teller” Glenn Beck doing these days?”

Oh, better than keef olbermann. And newsweak.

“I heard he has a TV show online or something that nobody watches.”

Bzzzt. Wrong. You’re talking about olbermann, and he was fired from that show.

Yawn. Troll FAIL.

GrassMudHorsey on April 19, 2012 at 11:45 AM

The lib “newsies” are going broke because nobody believes their lies anymore. And they just keep on pushing those lies.

VegasRick on April 19, 2012 at 10:51 AM

How’s that “truth teller” Glenn Beck doing these days? I heard he has a TV show online or something that nobody watches.

angryed on April 19, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Network media are public corporations, owned by stockholders with the purpose of earning money.

Constitutionally, the press has a responsibility to seek out and publish the truth about their government for the benefit of the governed.

While the two goals at times may be in conflict, the press becomes like Frankenstein’s monster when it decides of its own accord to violate both of its missions.

No matter how few watchers an internet show has, it won’t be wasting shareholder money in contravention of its own mission statements, will it?

rwenger43 on April 19, 2012 at 11:50 AM

This poll should remind us all:

“Figures don’t lie, but liars figure.”

NeoDawg on April 19, 2012 at 11:56 AM

First Rule of RomneyAir: If a poll comes out that says something you don’t like, the poll must be biased

angryed on April 19, 2012 at 10:57 AM

– except that the sampling biases have been pointed out here in great detail, whereas you’re unable to find similar sampling biases that favor the Republican candidate. In fact, someone actually pointed out that the polls with good news for the Republican candidate have no such biases. So…

bmmg39 on April 19, 2012 at 12:01 PM

Poor Bo, his limo rides will be over soon.

Run Bo, run, Daddy’s stoking the charcoal grill.

fogw on April 19, 2012 at 12:04 PM

It’s simple. Single women will not vote for someone who will take away they reproductive rights.

angryed on April 19, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Please provide a reference as to which candidate has a platform of mandatory sterilization. As far as I know, all single women have a right to reproduce, as well as all married women.

Unless of course you’re referencing Obama’s science czar who co-wrote a book that discussed mandatory sterilization.

dominigan on April 19, 2012 at 12:07 PM

It’s simple. Single women will not vote for someone who will take away they reproductive rights.

angryed on April 19, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Good grief! Who in this country has tried to take away the right to reproduce? Certainly not Mitt Romney.

bmmg39 on April 19, 2012 at 12:10 PM

What’s worse? Being unemployed for a few months or being stuck with an unwanted child for 18 years?

angryed on April 19, 2012 at 11:21 AM

So… are you angry because your mother hated you? You seem fixated on this whole “unwanted child” talking point.

You do realize that there’s this little thing called adoption, right? Expectant mothers who are unprepared to provide for a child can decide to put their child up for adoption so that everyone has a chance for happiness. They don’t have to be “stuck with an unwanted child for 18 years”… instead, they can give the child up to a couple who have a strong desire to raise and nurture a child.

And I know this for a fact… my sister has 2 adopted children, from the same mother and has kept in contact with her. In fact, my sister and her husband helped the birth mother with finishing college and getting her life back on track. Which is a MUCH better outcome than you keep dumping on these threads!

dominigan on April 19, 2012 at 12:15 PM

As I keep saying in these threads, the LSM is going to continue to fake and contrive these poll results to keep Barry Soetoro in the race, at least perception-ally.

Then when Romney wins 40 states they will use their own contrived polls to either start the riots or de-legitimize his Presidency, much in the way they tried to use the defective exit polls that showed a John F “Jengis Kahn” Kerry landslide over W.

wildcat72 on April 19, 2012 at 12:17 PM

The sad thing is that hardly any of us at hotair think Obama is a nice guy, only Romney thinks so!

LevinFan on April 19, 2012 at 11:01 AM

Romney no more thinks Obama is a nice guy than the idea that Obama actually opposes gay marriage. It is a shrewd political calculation.

Polls say most people (unaffiliated swing voters – not hotair commenters) think Obama is personally likable, even if they think he isn’t very good. Romney reads polls and understands this. So, he is trying to appeal to these people by essentially saying, “he may be nice, but he’s inept”.

The Count on April 19, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Or…

Have an avenue by which a woman who got pregnant on accident can terminate the pregnancy. Hey wait a minute, that avenue exists.

angryed on April 19, 2012 at 11:28 AM

How does a woman get pregnant on accident? Crash into a dick?

spinach.chin on April 19, 2012 at 12:29 PM

She’s actually the poster girl for why abortion should be legal. Why would you force a woman like that to have children when obviously she did not want to be a mother? Serious question. If she were to get pregnant again, would you be opposed to her having an abortion?

angryed on April 19, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Assuming she’s guilty of killing her child, she did have an abortion; she merely waited a few years. Other than that, no difference.

bmmg39 on April 19, 2012 at 12:39 PM

So… are you angry because your mother hated you? You seem fixated on this whole “unwanted child” talking point.

You do realize that there’s this little thing called adoption, right? Expectant mothers who are unprepared to provide for a child can decide to put their child up for adoption so that everyone has a chance for happiness. They don’t have to be “stuck with an unwanted child for 18 years”… instead, they can give the child up to a couple who have a strong desire to raise and nurture a child.

And I know this for a fact… my sister has 2 adopted children, from the same mother and has kept in contact with her. In fact, my sister and her husband helped the birth mother with finishing college and getting her life back on track. Which is a MUCH better outcome than you keep dumping on these threads!

dominigan on April 19, 2012 at 12:15 PM

Very well said. Other than rape and incest, abortion is a selfish and souless act.

LevinFan on April 19, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Romney no more thinks Obama is a nice guy than the idea that Obama actually opposes gay marriage. It is a shrewd political calculation.

Polls say most people (unaffiliated swing voters – not hotair commenters) think Obama is personally likable, even if they think he isn’t very good. Romney reads polls and understands this. So, he is trying to appeal to these people by essentially saying, “he may be nice, but he’s inept”.

The Count on April 19, 2012 at 12:25 PM

I understand and I think it’s the wrong move.

McCain already tried this, it didn’t work.

Call it the way it is and use the abundance of facts to back it up.

LevinFan on April 19, 2012 at 12:43 PM

What I don’t understand is why manipulate in such an obvious way, rather than just lie about the responses?

I think they’re trying their best but they’re just idiots.

bernverdnardo1 on April 19, 2012 at 10:49 AM

they are not that stupid to risk ruining their reputation by tampering with the data, other than tweaking here and there or adjusting here and there within the error margins…if anything transpired, which is not that difficult after all (think how many people work on data collection), that would raise a serious credibility issue…not that their reputation isn’t tarnished anyways, but still..in my opinion they should just get out of the political (or at least electoral) survey/polls business altogether, the media I mean, we all know how biased they are, and leave it to the pro organizations that do just that for a living to conduct surveys…

jimver on April 19, 2012 at 12:49 PM

What’s worse? Being unemployed for a few months or being stuck with an unwanted child for 18 years?

angryed on April 19, 2012 at 11:21 AM

If you don’t want children, don’t have sex.

If you decide to have sex, you accept the consequences of your actions.

Moreover, abortion has nothing to do with women. It has everything to do with liberal men like yourself who won’t pay for contraception, won’t take responsibility for your children, and insist that women have no right to say no. You’ve attacked women who won’t sleep with you as prudes and made it clear that the only value a woman has to liberals is if she puts out sexually.

northdallasthirty on April 19, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Call it the way it is and use the abundance of facts to back it up.

LevinFan on April 19, 2012 at 12:43 PM

It’s easier to convince people with facts that someone is lousy at their job than to use damning facts as a reason for them to dislike someone. The latter is an emotional response that people need to feel out on their own – not feel what you’re trying to tell them.

Think about it like this: we’ve all known someone that we may like but is hated by someone else you like and who tries to convince you to also hate that person. It’s hard because that person seems perfectly nice to you.

On the other hand, if your other friend constantly talks about all mistakes friend #1 has done to you behind your back, you will start to dislike him all on your own.

The Count on April 19, 2012 at 1:32 PM

What’s worse? Being unemployed for a few months or being stuck punished with an unwanted child for 18 years?

angryed on April 19, 2012 at 11:21 AM

FIFY’d they way your marxist messiah would have wanted you to spew it.

FlaMurph on April 19, 2012 at 2:32 PM

There is a really strong resemblance between the way leftist pollsters manipulate their data and the way warmthers manipulate their data. If it doesn’t show what they want, they “correct” it until it does.

I wonder if the failure of the media to question warmther data is because they actually believe that when you ask a scientific question, and you think you know the answer, the best way to approach it is to adjust the data to fit what you want the answer to be.

American liberal higher education at its finest.

talkingpoints on April 19, 2012 at 2:33 PM

It’s easier to convince people with facts that someone is lousy at their job than to use damning facts as a reason for them to dislike someone. The latter is an emotional response that people need to feel out on their own – not feel what you’re trying to tell them.

Think about it like this: we’ve all known someone that we may like but is hated by someone else you like and who tries to convince you to also hate that person. It’s hard because that person seems perfectly nice to you.

On the other hand, if your other friend constantly talks about all mistakes friend #1 has done to you behind your back, you will start to dislike him all on your own.

The Count on April 19, 2012 at 1:32 PM

Again, Reagan didn’t mince words when attacking Carter.

Romney shouldn’t sugarcoat it by saying that Obama is “just in over his head”.

When you do stuff like that you risk people thinking that things aren’t really all that bad. They may be more prone to believing that the economy is now improving a bit and that Obama really has our best interests at heart and will now finally be able to fix things.

It’s Romney’s duty to inform that public that Obama is a socialist. That he’s intentionally trying to destroy the free market. That when he said “we are just five days away from fundamentally transforming the US” that he wasn’t kidding!

People need to know how serious this is. If they think Obama is not that bad of a guy they may be more willing to give him a second chance not realizing his radical intentions to make us into a permanent socialist ruin.

LevinFan on April 19, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Single women have ideals and married women have bills.

lovingmyUSA on April 19, 2012 at 2:59 PM

It’s easier to convince people with facts that someone is lousy at their job than to use damning facts as a reason for them to dislike someone. The latter is an emotional response that people need to feel out on their own – not feel what you’re trying to tell them.

The Count on April 19, 2012 at 1:32 PM

Oh my god, please tell me you’re not this naive.

I don’t mean to get personal, really, but it’s much more difficult to reach people with facts than it is to rile them up with emotional appeals. A mob is actually pretty easy to get going. I’ve mentioned before that I was deep in the area of the LA riots, and believe me the only thing required for alot of that violence to get going was a damn TV camera!

Do you think even one of those rioters would have responded correctly to an appeal to their logic?

Most people are sheep. All leftists are either sheep or slave masters. That describes their entire worldview. It’s really just a question of which leftist is better at whipping up the inevitable mob.

Do I have a dim view of humanity? Obviously. Is it justified? Show me where it’s not.

runawayyyy on April 19, 2012 at 5:13 PM

Angryed worried about animal abuse but championing abortion…what a sick phucker.

CW on April 19, 2012 at 5:52 PM

Anyone surprised that 80% of single women under age 30 are Liberal? Anyone surprised that 99% of those on welfare are Obama supporters?

One sad thing for me is the realization that the networks hire experts in ‘poll analysis’ and start each poll with the statement “here’s what we want the poll to show’. That makes it much easier to design the polling process. I’ll bet most of them are single women under age 30. lol

dahni on April 20, 2012 at 1:04 PM

The WSJ/NBC poll is also completely worthless, as it samples all adults instead of registered voters or likely voters.

Why are they doing this? Do they think we actually believe Barack Obama is more popular than he really is? How long will they keep up this charade, until the final weekend before the election?

J Baustian on April 21, 2012 at 12:30 AM

Comment pages: 1 2