Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

pnwmom

(108,980 posts)
Fri Sep 16, 2016, 10:01 AM Sep 2016

What the likely voter models are missing: Obama's -- now Hillary's -- ground game.

This was an article from 2012 about Obama -- but Hillary's organization is on track to match his, if we all do our parts and never give up!

Notice that this article was written mid-October, and they had just switched to likely voters. I wonder why the pollsters have switched earlier this year.


http://www.thepeoplesview.net/main/epeoplesview.net/2012/10/ground-game-why-registered-voter.html

The media and the pollsters, as if right on queue, have started feeding the masses the "news" that the "race for president is tightening." I have made the case that most of that is horse manure, but I have also made the case in the same breath that the universe of who votes will determine who wins this election. In that vein, let's talk a little bit about the polling universes. Gallup recently switched to hilighting "likely voter" numbers rather than registered voters, but today's numbers from Gallup shows a tie on likely voters while the president is ahead 50-45 nationally among registered voters. A CNN/ORC poll from Ohio put Mitt Romney within 4 points of the President (51-47) among who they consider "likely" voters, whereas the same poll's registered voter preferences showed the president with a commanding 10-point (53-43) lead.

So, why does that matter? Aren't likely voters what should be looked at this late in the game? Not exactly. Firstly, the newly registered are almost never considered 'likely', since they have no voting history (it's like having no credit). Given the way pollsters determine who is a likely voter - which includes a given person's voting history - the "likely" voter universe is always skewed towards conservatives.

SNIP

I would contend that in this election, the registered voter numbers are more important than usual. Because in this election, pollsters are more likely to discount Democratic enthusiasm as a part of their discounting of 'unlikely' voters. In this election, pollsters are not likely to pick up on the minority, youth and poor groundswell (overlay this with women - especially young women) with their predictive models. In this election, the Obama campaign is getting those voters out. People are already voting in many battle ground states. In Iowa, four times as many Democrats requested vote-by-mail ballots as Republicans, for example. The Obama campaign has pushed the same thing in Florida. The President was getting the early vote out in Ohio himself yesterday.

The media has written and talked about Obama's doomsday before. People have bet against this president before. Exactly zero of those bets ever paid off. Get. Out. The Vote!

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
What the likely voter models are missing: Obama's -- now Hillary's -- ground game. (Original Post) pnwmom Sep 2016 OP
another difference NewJeffCT Sep 2016 #1
This is not encouraging Cicada Sep 2016 #2
Trump MUST win Ohio, but it's not a must win for Hillary. nt pnwmom Sep 2016 #3
Do you have the RCP avg of LV and RV voting results for 2012 in Ohio? thx much uponit7771 Sep 2016 #5
See fivethirtyeight link below Cicada Sep 2016 #6
The LV models are asinine at best uponit7771 Sep 2016 #4
exactly-- the Dems have a VERY thorough and precise system for targeting their voters Fast Walker 52 Sep 2016 #7

NewJeffCT

(56,828 posts)
1. another difference
Fri Sep 16, 2016, 10:02 AM
Sep 2016

is that while Romney's ground game was not nearly as good as Obama's game, he at least had one. Trump's ground game is weak and pathetic, like the candidate himself.

Cicada

(4,533 posts)
2. This is not encouraging
Fri Sep 16, 2016, 11:21 AM
Sep 2016

Obama won ohio by 3, close to likely voter poll. Not close to registered voter measurement. I guess we should look at average likely voter spread, average registered voter spread, actual vote for several elections.

Cicada

(4,533 posts)
6. See fivethirtyeight link below
Sun Sep 18, 2016, 12:27 PM
Sep 2016

See fivethirtyeight.com/features/registered-voter-polls-will-usually-overrated-democrats/

That provides more general info on accuracy of registered voter and likely voter polls

I hope the link is correct. I have not yet figured out how to cut and paste on the tablet I am using

 

Fast Walker 52

(7,723 posts)
7. exactly-- the Dems have a VERY thorough and precise system for targeting their voters
Sun Sep 18, 2016, 02:39 PM
Sep 2016

good discussion of it with Mitch Stewart on the Sept 9th show here:
https://theringer.com/keepin-it-1600-podcast-politics-election-jon-favreau-dan-pfeiffer-220924af4c94#.roa8m9s51

And I keep thinking the models just aren't taking this into account.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»What the likely voter mod...