Welcome to ASFN Fan Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
Why National Polls may be wrong in this election, anecdotal thought
I was talking to my mom the other day, and her and my step dad have taken themselves off land lines and have gone totally cellular. We were talking about how trends show the majority of Americans will be cellular only in the next decade. Then we started talking about how I am getting tons of political calls on my land line, and she's getting zero on her cell phone. I have got survey calls, she doesn't. In general younger people tend to go cell phone only. Many older people tend to stick to land lines and use cell phones only for travel. How can national polls be accurate when many people aren't even listed because they've gone totally cellular?
I would guess there's more Obama supporters that have gone cellular only, than McCain supporters. Thus, McCain's numbers are probably over represented, and Obama's grossly underrepresented. So the national polls that show them a few percentage points apart are probably really off.
That also probably explains why most of the people I meet in Nevada say they are voting Obama, (Believe me, in my county it's a 2-1 Republican registration so I hardly am meeting just Democrats), yet polls show the state as a toss up. My county is way more conservative than Las Vegas and Reno, too! I bet the pollsters can only call who has land lines, and they are missing a huge amount of people who are cell phone only people. I have yet to meet someone who has had a political call on their cell phone here in Nevada.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
__________________ KOC Rules!
Yuma's Dad RIP 03/22/07
I still have a gut feeling Shaq will be better next season (2008/2009) after our docs have a full off season to work their magic on the Big Saguaro!
I was talking to my mom the other day, and her and my step dad have taken themselves off land lines and have gone totally cellular. We were talking about how trends show the majority of Americans will be cellular only in the next decade. Then we started talking about how I am getting tons of political calls on my land line, and she's getting zero on her cell phone. I have got survey calls, she doesn't. In general younger people tend to go cell phone only. Many older people tend to stick to land lines and use cell phones only for travel. How can national polls be accurate when many people aren't even listed because they've gone totally cellular?
I would guess there's more Obama supporters that have gone cellular only, than McCain supporters. Thus, McCain's numbers are probably over represented, and Obama's grossly underrepresented. So the national polls that show them a few percentage points apart are probably really off.
That also probably explains why most of the people I meet in Nevada say they are voting Obama, (Believe me, in my county it's a 2-1 Republican registration so I hardly am meeting just Democrats), yet polls show the state as a toss up. My county is way more conservative than Las Vegas and Reno, too! I bet the pollsters can only call who has land lines, and they are missing a huge amount of people who are cell phone only people. I have yet to meet someone who has had a political call on their cell phone here in Nevada.
On the flipside, these younger voters that you are referring to, are the ones that are less likely to vote. So they may have chosen Obama as their candidate, but getting them out to the polls may be an issue.
On the flipside, these younger voters that you are referring to, are the ones that are less likely to vote. So they may have chosen Obama as their candidate, but getting them out to the polls may be an issue.
It's the same thing on the Republican side. The Republicans I know here are saying they are not liking McCain as their candidate, and they may vote Obama, IF they vote at all. Many of them are saying why bother. I sense a LOT of Republican apathy this time. Both sides have to get out the vote, imho. That's what is going to determine this election because the previous two were essentially 50/50 splits. It seems the Dems are getting more people involved this time.
Plus, the younger people I was referring to are essentially anyone under 65!
__________________ KOC Rules!
Yuma's Dad RIP 03/22/07
I still have a gut feeling Shaq will be better next season (2008/2009) after our docs have a full off season to work their magic on the Big Saguaro!
You could be on to something Yuma. I would be surprised however, if the pollsters didn't also realize this and figure out a way around it. I wonder if they have a list of people that they regularly call?
Anyone familiar with the polling situation?
__________________
“So I became a newspaperman. I hated to do it but I couldn’t find honest employment.” —Mark Twain
You could be on to something Yuma. I would be surprised however, if the pollsters didn't also realize this and figure out a way around it. I wonder if they have a list of people that they regularly call?
Anyone familiar with the polling situation?
A bit. I was going to mention the cell v. landline in another thread. We discussed this a few years ago in some of my classes on polling and statistics. The most likely group to be cell only is the 18-36 (something like that), so while that group is less likely to actually vote, they are vastly under-represented in these polls.
There are other factors, such as the type of people home at the hours they call. Often they call around the time a family traditionally sits down for dinner... traditionalists tend to be conservative. People that work evenings aren't home, I would guess a lot of people that tend to work those hours are younger and liberal. If they are going to do phone surveys, there really isn't a way to adjust the poll. They call random people and they get whoever is around AND willing to take the time to talk to them.
With today's technology, they need to update their methods big time.
So many things can throw off the intent of a poll.
I was talking to my mom the other day, and her and my step dad have taken themselves off land lines and have gone totally cellular. We were talking about how trends show the majority of Americans will be cellular only in the next decade. Then we started talking about how I am getting tons of political calls on my land line, and she's getting zero on her cell phone. I have got survey calls, she doesn't. In general younger people tend to go cell phone only. Many older people tend to stick to land lines and use cell phones only for travel. How can national polls be accurate when many people aren't even listed because they've gone totally cellular?
I would guess there's more Obama supporters that have gone cellular only, than McCain supporters. Thus, McCain's numbers are probably over represented, and Obama's grossly underrepresented. So the national polls that show them a few percentage points apart are probably really off.
That also probably explains why most of the people I meet in Nevada say they are voting Obama, (Believe me, in my county it's a 2-1 Republican registration so I hardly am meeting just Democrats), yet polls show the state as a toss up. My county is way more conservative than Las Vegas and Reno, too! I bet the pollsters can only call who has land lines, and they are missing a huge amount of people who are cell phone only people. I have yet to meet someone who has had a political call on their cell phone here in Nevada.
Great observation! It's illegal for them to call cell numbers because they use peoples minutes. We've been cell only now for about 10 years and I've never had one call concerning elections or advertising. Your realization is part of the discussion concerning polling, it's just that nothings been done to adjust for it.
Now if we could just get those innovative, yet lazy kids to the polls in November!
The assumption on which you're relying, that Obama supporters are more likely to have cell phones, may not be accurate. Obama supporters (like those of many Democrats) are more likely than McCain supporters to be poor. I have no idea whether persons with lower incomes are less likely to have cell phones, but I suspect that may be so.
(And so nobody gripes, I realize many in upper income brackets, especially the very rich, support Obama--but the majority of middle-income Americans tend to be Republicans).
Also, pollsters don't necessarily report the hard results from surveys. They'll take into account whether certain interviewees tend toward one end of the political spectrum, and adjust polls accordingly--hence, the margin of error attendant in most published polls.
The assumption on which you're relying, that Obama supporters are more likely to have cell phones, may not be accurate. Obama supporters (like those of many Democrats) are more likely than McCain supporters to be poor. I have no idea whether persons with lower incomes are less likely to have cell phones, but I suspect that may be so.
(And so nobody gripes, I realize many in upper income brackets, especially the very rich, support Obama--but the majority of middle-income Americans tend to be Republicans).
Also, pollsters don't necessarily report the hard results from surveys. They'll take into account whether certain interviewees tend toward one end of the political spectrum, and adjust polls accordingly--hence, the margin of error attendant in most published polls.
Sorry Kolo, you're o so very wrong. The only assumptions going on are by you that they can adjust and that poor folks don't have cells. That is a huge assumption and it doesn't represent the cell only culture.
This has been an ongoing discussion for a few years now and they still have no answer for it.
The CDC recently did a study on this issue due to heath care, but it shows exactly what I said. link
More than one-half of all adults living with unrelated roommates (56.9%) lived in households with only wireless telephones. This is the highest prevalence rate among the population subgroups examined.
Adults renting their home (30.9%) were more likely than adults owning their home (7.3%) to be living in households with only wireless telephones.
More than one in three adults aged 25-29 years (34.5%) lived in households with only wireless telephones. Nearly 31% of adults aged 18-24 years lived in households with only wireless telephones.
As age increased, the percentage of adults living in households with only wireless telephones decreased: 15.5% for adults aged 30-44 years; 8.0% for adults aged 45-64 years; and 2.2% for adults aged 65 years and over.
Men (15.9%) were more likely than women (13.2%) to be living in households with only wireless telephones.
Adults living in poverty (27.4%) were more likely than higher income adults to be living in households with only wireless telephones.
Adults living in the South (17.1%) and Midwest (15.3%) were more likely than adults living in the Northeast (10.0%) to be living in households with only wireless telephones.
Non-Hispanic white adults (12.9%) were less likely than Hispanic adults (19.3%) or non-Hispanic black adults (18.3%) to be living in households with only wireless telephones.
Sorry Kolo, you're o so very wrong. The only assumptions going on are by you that they can adjust and that poor folks don't have cells. That is a huge assumption and it doesn't represent the cell only culture.
What is it with reading comprehension, and the zeal with which some on this board try to catch people being wrong? I wrote the OP's assumption "may not be accurate," and that "I have no idea whether persons with lower incomes are less likely to have cell phones, but I suspect that may be so."
What is it with reading comprehension, and the zeal with which some on this board try to catch people being wrong? I wrote the OP's assumption "may not be accurate," and that "I have no idea whether persons with lower incomes are less likely to have cell phones, but I suspect that may be so."
Thanks, but I read you just fine. How about you?
"The only assumptions going on are by you that they can adjust and that poor folks don't have cells."
You said they adjust the polls accordingly for this stuff, I just got done saying they can't. Not for this they can't. You challanged my claim (at least that's how I read it) and I defended it.
As far as the poor folks using cell phones, I just showed that your
suspection, according to the study, was wrong. That's the only reason I bolded that. First, to show that the poor are cell only more so than the rich and the rest of the stats support that a large portion of young are not part of these polls. I think we agree that the majority of this age group are liberal.
Just read the first article and noticed the survey was done maybe three years ago. What I am noticing, anecdotally, is that with the economy tightening I've heard people say they are cutting bills, and they are choosing to keep their cell phone over their land line. I'm thinking the cell phone only trend is speeding up. Especially when you count all the people losing their homes to foreclosure. By the way, anyone you know that has lost a home has to re-register in order to vote in the upcoming presidential election. At least here in Nevada, they won't take PO Box numbers for voting.
the second article captures what I am saying, and "But cell-only adults are very different. The National Health Interview Survey found them to be much younger, more likely to be African American or Hispanic, less likely to be married, and less likely to be a homeowner than adults with landline telephones." These are Obama demographics where he gets a higher percentage of voters than McCain, according to national surveys.
From the third article: For example, when asked which candidate they were leaning toward voting for, the Obama supporters were fairly close in the first three groups (46 percent, 48 percent and 49 percent respectively) while the cell-only group supported Obama 61 percent of the time. When asked whether they were likely to support the Republican or the Democrat in their local congressional races, the first three groups were all at 52 percent for the Democrat, while the cell-only group was at 63 percent for the Democrat. Those are significant differences.
The problem for pollsters is that the cell-only group is underrepresented in polls.
I think most elections this wouldn't matter, except this election there really is a difference in voting patterns especially in age groups.
__________________ KOC Rules!
Yuma's Dad RIP 03/22/07
I still have a gut feeling Shaq will be better next season (2008/2009) after our docs have a full off season to work their magic on the Big Saguaro!
Last edited by Yuma; August 6th, 2008 at 08:42 PM.
"The only assumptions going on are by you that they can adjust and that poor folks don't have cells."
You said they adjust the polls accordingly for this stuff, I just got done saying they can't. Not for this they can't. You challanged my claim (at least that's how I read it) and I defended it.
No, you said I assumed "poor folks don't have cells," when I avowed my ignorance and said I suspect they might not.
But, whatever. I'm sure you've got better things to do than parse message board posts, as do I.
Cosmic Defender Champion!
Linear Mode
