Polls got it right, despite pre-election criticism
After months of partisan criticism, angry dismissals and cries to “unskew” their results, it turns out pollsters know what they're talking about.
Every poll in the past two weeks — except a Tribune-Review survey — showed President Obama would win Pennsylvania's 20 electoral votes on Tuesday. Most of the seven surveys showed him winning by 4 to 6 percentage points, and he won by 5.2 points.
“The winners of last night were Barack Obama, Bob Casey and the pollsters,” said Jefrey Pollock, CEO of the Democratic firm Global Strategies Group.
Pollock's most recent poll showed Obama winning by 6 points and Sen. Bob Casey Jr. winning by 7; the Scranton Democrat beat Republican Tom Smith of Armstrong County by 8.
The Trib poll, conducted Oct. 29-31 by Susquehanna Polling & Research, found Obama tied with Republican Mitt Romney at 47 percent and Casey leading Smith 46 percent to 45 percent, with an error margin of 3.46 percentage points. Romney ended up with about 47 percent and Smith reached 45 percent, but their Democratic opponents outperformed the poll by 5 and 7.6 percentage points, respectively.
Susquehanna underestimated turnout among Democratic-friendly segments of the population, said Susquehanna's president, Jim Lee. Young voters and Philadelphia-area Democrats turned out in numbers close to those in 2008, when Obama won the state by 10 points, Lee said.
“That caught me off guard. I didn't think that was going to happen. I didn't think the enthusiasm was there,” Lee said.
Voters ages 18 to 29 were a key constituency in Obama's 2008 victory, when they turned out in record numbers.
“I was suggesting it would be lower with that age group, given unemployment was considerably higher” for them, Lee said. Federal statistics show 22.7 percent of 18- and 19-year-olds are unemployed, and 13.2 percent of those ages 20 to 24, compared with 7.9 percent unemployment overall.
Lee thought those voters would be around 10 percent of the electorate. Exit polls showed they made up nearly 20 percent, and 63 percent of them chose Obama.
Democrat-heavy Philadelphia accounted for about 12 percent of the electorate, as it did in 2008 when Obama drew record numbers of black voters to the polls.
“While whites went 57-42 for Romney — which was not as much as Romney needed — blacks went 93-6 for Obama, and Hispanics went 80-18 for Obama,” said Bruce Haynes, a Republican strategist in Washington.
That contributed to the Trib poll's sampling problem, he said. “The pollster chose the wrong turnout model. If you go back and reweigh their numbers, they would have nailed it.”
Democrats who criticized Lee's polls frequently pointed out that he conducts internal polls for GOP campaigns and the state Republican Party. Lee said he doesn't mold results to suit clients.
“Are we a Republican polling firm? Yeah. I'm not pretending that we aren't. But when (the results) benefit Democrats, we say it,” Lee said.
In 2010, his polls correctly showed a 2-point lead for Republican Pat Toomey in the Senate race when other polls showed him farther ahead. Susquehanna's was the only state poll that said Rep. Mark Critz would beat opponent Tim Burns in 2010.
Lee noted the poll showing a tied presidential race also showed Democrat Kathleen Kane leading the attorney general's race by 11 points. She won that race.
“If we were cooking the results, would we have shown that margin for Kane?” he said.
Figuring out the demographic breakdown for any poll includes some uncertainty, said G. Terry Madonna, director of Franklin & Marshall College Poll. Madonna's last poll found Obama leading Romney 49-45 percent.
Madonna took criticism shortly before the April primary, when GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum accused him of being a “Democratic hack.” At the time, Santorum, a former Pennsylvania senator, was fighting for his political life as Pennsylvania slipped toward Romney. Madonna provoked his ire by releasing a poll that showed him up only 2 points over Romney, a month after Romney trailed Santorum in the state by nearly 30 points.
“It's the nature of the polarized environment we're in,” Madonna said. “The side that's losing gets upset.”
Vitriol heaped on pollsters and statisticians rose to new heights as people who once grumbled privately took to Twitter and other social media to criticize polls they didn't like and attack people such as the New York Times' Nate Silver, whose poll aggregates showed Obama as odds-on favorite for months.
“We have no desire and no need to skew the data,” Pollock said. “If we say somebody's going to win and they lose, we don't get hired.”
Staff writer Salena Zito contributed to this report. Mike Wereschagin is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7900 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.