January 10, 2010

Yeah, That Globe Poll Looks Wrong
— Ace

Karl explains the differences in the polls. The Globe poll polled only 83 independents -- not nearly enough for a decent sub-sample. PPP polled 290.

Fred Bauer notes the Globe's independents simply do not conform to other polls' findings about them.

I think a lot of the discrepancy between this poll and other polls boils down to the independents. According to this poll, the Registered Undeclared voters support Coakley over Brown 48-42. This number is wildly out of line with the recent polls released by Rasmussen and PPP, both of which show Brown leading handily with independents, winning at least 60% of their votes (Coakley hangs at between around 20% and 30% of independents). If, using all the other weighting methodologies of the Globe poll, you change the undeclared levels of support to 61% for Brown and 31% for Coakley (her highest number in the most recent polls), you come up with a 47-44 lead for Brown.

Yeah, but Rasmussen is Satan's Pollster.

Posted by: Ace at 10:54 AM | Comments (22)
Post contains 175 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Shhhh - If we can keep them from getting nervous as long as possible, let's do it.

Rasmussen is Satan's pollster.  PPP is Moloch.  Pay no attention to them.

Posted by: AD at January 10, 2010 11:05 AM (INZCg)

2 Whoa...  It loaded.  Someone needs to buy the (server) farm.

Posted by: Old Sailor at January 10, 2010 11:05 AM (/Ft4q)

3 I'm texting/calling every one of my friends (most of whom are Dems by occupation, or just politically naive) in MA  and asking them to vote for Brown. I've saved my chits over the years and never asked any (well, many) of them to vote for anyone specific. Some will definitely hook me up and vote Brown. I can't believe I'm not a registered MA voter for the first legit Senate election since I've been a voter. My timing sucks.

Posted by: lincolntf at January 10, 2010 11:07 AM (rwlcW)

4 It's great that you're posting all this content Ace but maybe you could stop and kick Pixy so Pixy could kick the servers.  This is painful!

Posted by: BJ Clinton at January 10, 2010 11:09 AM (VuLos)

5 See, that's why Karl is teh smart and passes along his smarts to Ace's smart, military blog and why us morons stop in.

Posted by: Moron#127354 at January 10, 2010 11:10 AM (LKkE8)

6 Damn sockpuppet...I blame pixy.

Posted by: Tami at January 10, 2010 11:14 AM (VuLos)

7 As stated, the largest problem with the Globe's poll is that it over polls Democrats, and incredibly under polls Independents.

The reason why this is a problem is because Independents make up over 50% of the voting registration.

Posted by: enoxo at January 10, 2010 11:14 AM (YFjad)

8

The UNH polling service that did this poll is terrible. They use students to cold call people and have an agenda. 

Posted by: American Barbarian at January 10, 2010 11:18 AM (GM03c)

9 #7 -

This is a special election.  Undeclared turnout may be lower than usual.  Or not.  Nobody will really know until election day - though partisans are more likely to turn out for off-season, off-year special elections than nonpartisans. 

Differing turnout models = wildly inconsistent polling.

Posted by: cinyc at January 10, 2010 11:18 AM (qPFNG)

10 I'm not counting unhatched chickens.  If Brown can pull this off in MA, its a miracle.

Special election is nine days away, and that still enough time for quite a bit to happen.


Posted by: looking closely at January 10, 2010 11:22 AM (9CRJf)

11 10 I'm not counting unhatched chickens.  If Brown can pull this off in MA, its a miracle.

Special election is nine days away, and that still enough time for quite a bit to happen.

Posted by: looking closely at January 10, 2010 03:22 PM (9CRJf)


I seem to recall the same being said of a GOP win in New Jersey.

Posted by: Mary Beth at January 10, 2010 11:39 AM (JPEqm)

12

There's just no way, NO WAY, that the Globe would publish faulty polls that would keep conservatives from voting. Why, they'd just as soon pick our candidates. 

No way, I tell you.

Posted by: Avg American at January 10, 2010 11:58 AM (d7Px0)

13 Charles sent me over to help with the servers.  You're, er I mean I'm almost done.

Posted by: Stinky Beaumont at January 10, 2010 12:02 PM (d7Px0)

14 Some citizens' group needs to organize "fair voting volunteers" that will patrol polling places with video cameras. This in an effort to prevent intimidation that is later ruled not to be intimidation.

Posted by: elloit m at January 10, 2010 12:22 PM (rHQQw)

15

Some citizens' group needs to organize "fair voting volunteers" that will patrol polling places with video cameras.

They have those - they are called election judges. Want to combat voter fraud. Want to make sure elections don't get stolen. Volt. to be an election judge. Its not glorious work. You go through several hours of training, show up on election day at 4 or 5 a.m., your there for 12 hours and, for the most part, you don't get paid. Or, on the other hand, you can complain about ACORN and the dems. Your choice.  If interested, contact your local Republican party and volunteer. And let them know, you will go to any precient, not just your own.

Sure but do they hang out on the sidewalk and or street corner?

Posted by: elloit m at January 10, 2010 12:42 PM (rHQQw)

16 This can't be, Ace. I mean, it would be like basing trillion-dollar decisions on hand-picked data on climate from one tree and a dozen trees instead of the 50 or so trees in the same data set.

Posted by: andycanuck at January 10, 2010 01:36 PM (2qU2d)

17 THE GLOBE POLL IS BULLSHIT.  THEY'RE ASTROTURFING BECAUSE THEY'RE AWARE THAT BROWN STANDS A CHANCE.

Posted by: GarandFan at January 10, 2010 01:45 PM (ZQBnQ)

18 Interesting take by Polipundit: "WeÂ’ll see what happens on January 19. Personally, I believe a Coakley win by single digits would be an ideal outcome. It would push more Democrats to retire, while preserving a 60-vote Dem Senate majority that would force the Dems to consider (and fail to pass) massively unpopular legislation like illegal-alien amnesty and Cap-and-Tax."

Posted by: CoolCzech at January 10, 2010 02:39 PM (QECjC)

19 7 As stated, the largest problem with the Globe's poll is that it's the Globe's poll... Posted by: enoxo at January 10, 2010 03:14 PM (YFjad) A little help from your buddy turfmann, whose dog will not shit on the Boston Globe in protest of their infidelity to legitimate journalism. No kidding, he's one of those incredible border collies that are way smarter than people. In fact, you probably think that turfmann is typing this don't you? Nah, it's me Fred the border collie. I tricked turfmann into going out to get me some beggin' strips. I just sat down at the computer for a minute to catch up on some doggie porn while he was out.

Posted by: turfmann at January 10, 2010 04:38 PM (SgGTT)

20 #19 That's not Astroturfing.  I'm not sure you can Astroturf a poll, but if you could, it would consist of two or more polls.  The first would show Brown tied or ahead or close, the second, would show what this poll shows...

Posted by: ParisParamus at January 10, 2010 06:43 PM (Hv1Cx)

21

The Globe is just a dust-up for when ACORN moves in with their magical recount method of finding "missing" votes to elect Coakley.

Stealing elections is what Democrats do and the Globe is running cover for the operation.

 

Posted by: LogicalUS at January 10, 2010 07:36 PM (Eem1Z)

22 The polls do not lie. That Martha Coakley is very well spoken for a C....

Posted by: Harry Reid at January 11, 2010 04:49 AM (Ki7fm)

Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
75kb generated in CPU 0.0689, elapsed 0.2604 seconds.
64 queries taking 0.2323 seconds, 150 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.