FONT SIZE | RSS FEEDS EMAIL THIS PRINT THIS POST A COMMENT EMAIL ALERTS
View all blog entries
July 2006
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
« Jun   Aug »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  
Monthly archives
Poll questions

A word about polls: It all comes down to the methodology and sample size. The larger the sample, the more accurate the result, provided you’re asking question of the right voters. (Inveterate voters, the ones who not only say they’re going to vote on Election Day but who actually have voted on past election days, are the best.)

Having said that, we at Various Things & Stuff can say that Marvin Longabaugh of Magellan Research has always struck us as a good, honest pollster. He’s been doing it for awhile, and his record is pretty darn good. He understands the business and how it’s supposed to work. So let’s address his current and month-old numbers, and see what we can discern.

(The numbers were reported in John L. Smith’s column in the Review-Journal today.)

Here’s the matchup, as reported by Smith:

Jim Gibson: 39.5 percent

Dina Titus: 30.7 percent

Difference: 8.8 percent

Undecided: 29.8 percent

Now, let’s take a look at Magellan’s numbers from last month, also reported by Smith:

Jim Gibson: 38.1 percent

Dina Titus: 28 percent

Difference: 10.1 percent

Undecided: 33.9 percent

So, what conclusions can we draw?

First, it appears the numbers are solid, in that we don’t see big swings from month to month. About 4 percent made up their minds between the current poll and the last one, and those undecideds broke both ways.

Second, although early polls showed Titus ahead of Gibson, those were based on the most ephemeral of factors — name recognition. Gibson’s been on the air with ads, positive and negative, for a couple months, which could account for his surge in these Magellan polls. (In fact, the Gibson education spot in which he laments of schoolchildren, “If we’re last, where does that leave them?” is probably the best ad of the season thus far, even though it lacks specifics.)

Moreover, Gibson’s first-strike assault on Titus in the ad wars would naturally have the effect of lowering her support while raising his. Gibson has reminded voters up north that Titus hasn’t always had kind things to say about them in the past.

Third, Titus hasn’t just sat still. She’s fired back, starting at the end of June. This might explain her cutting into Gibson’s lead, from 10.1 percent in June to 8.8 percent this month. (If only the election were in February 2007, assuming a consistent rate of decline, they’d be even!)

Fourth, the truth of the matter is this: Ads move polls. Campaign appearances move polls. Stories in newspapers and on TV move polls. Debates move polls. And those poll numbers can shift between now and Aug. 15, when, as the politicians like to say, the only poll that matters is taken. (Usually, they say that when they’re behind in the other polls.)

Do the numbers reflect reality? Our unscientific view is that this is closer than an 8.8-point race, but we’ve nothing to base that on, other than gut feelings developed while covering umpteen campaigns. But there is no denying a few things: Gibson is ahead; Gibson’s TV ads have helped him; Gibson’s numbers are much better than when the race started.

But with 11 days until early voting begins and exactly one month until Election Day, our view is that either candidate can still win.

Up next: The Review-Journal’s latest poll, which should hit right before early voting, according to Editor Thomas Mitchell, who told a Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce audience recently the next poll would be available then.

We’ll be eagerly awaiting those results.

Post a comment!
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. By publishing a comment here you agree to the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the Online staff.
8 Responses to “Poll questions”
Written by: Chip Peterson on Saturday, Aug. 12, 2006 at 6:03 PM

FYI The Penguin, the margin of error for each poll was 3.2%. I agree that things can change because of the large number of undecideds, but please remember that in low turnout elections, the undecideds typically stay home. When they do vote, our post-election studies have shown that the undecided votes break down similarly to those who make up their minds early.

Written by: Marvin Longabaugh on Wednesday, Jul. 19, 2006 at 12:08 PM

I take back every rude thing I have ever said about you Steve. Although I am a Gibson supporter, and therfor inherently biased, I believe you did an excellent job in breaking down the polls.

Also, I never noticed how eloquent you can be, I was always so pissed about what you had said about Gibson to notice.

Written by: John on Wednesday, Jul. 19, 2006 at 11:44 AM

since all 4 candidates werent specifically “handicapped” in the latest poll, one could “spin ” the incomplete results to show that the incumbent Lt.Gov. and Ex-Porn star MIMI are tied, or even that mimi has taken the lead by a proverbial * hair.

That should make for interesting reading….
I’m looking for a 4 way split on the state GOP political spectrum, and hoping for at least a place or show in this Nevada “Horse race”.
what does “jimmy the greek” have to say about the numbers? and where can I place a bet? my moneys on mimi…

Roach

Written by: roach on Wednesday, Jul. 19, 2006 at 11:28 AM

Who cares? The only thing polls are good for are raising money. Anyone that is writing a check has either written one or read these polls and learned nothing new.

Written by: Goldy on Tuesday, Jul. 18, 2006 at 4:55 PM

All very impressive, but factor in the margin of error (which was…what?) and the still relatively high undecided quotient, and this thing is still too close to call.

Again, the only poll that truly matters is the one taken on Election Day. Especially for us Dems who are put off by the negativity from BOTH camps — and who therefore are undecided on whether to close our eyes and vote for one or hold our noses and vote for the other and hope that whoever wins stands a snowball’s chance against Jim “The Invisible Man” Gibbons.

Written by: The Penguin on Tuesday, Jul. 18, 2006 at 4:15 PM

It’s true that small samples and questioning the wrong group of voters can skew your results. And, let’s be honest, you get what you pay for: Good, accurate polls cost a lot of money. Less accurate polls are cheaper, and news organizations like cheap. That’s why you’ve got to look at polls with common sense as your guide. Big swings, unexplained rising and falling, these are warning signs that something is amiss.

And remember, polls are often used not just to tell a campaign where it stands vis a vis its opponent, but also to convince donors that a campaign is viable. So you get the spend-money/do a poll/get good results/raise money scenario.

I’m not very familiar with the Survey USA poll, its methods or whatnot, so I can’t comment directly on that. But be skeptical is great advice, not only for polls, but also ads and, hell, even news stories and columns, especially in the final weeks leading up to an election.

Written by: Steve Sebelius on Tuesday, Jul. 18, 2006 at 2:15 PM

Steve- Though I know you are not a huge Gibson man, I am relieved to see that at least one liberal Nevada Blogger has remained consistent in that the SurveyUSA polls are bunk do to questionable methodology and an uber-small sample size. The SUSA poll was easily dismissable in June and just as bogus today.
The Magellan polls at the very least show some level of consistency, and the number from month to month make logical sense, what more could you ask for from an internal poll.
Even though SUSA is independent, isn’t it time that pundits and voters alike to dismiss SUSA polls and for TV stations to qiut shoving that crap down are throats?

Written by: CollegeStudent on Tuesday, Jul. 18, 2006 at 2:03 PM
CityPics
Community photo sharing
View reader photos and share your own at CityPics