Zogby Interactive and the ‘I Knew It’ poll

yet another source debunks Zogby

Most political observers know to stop reading when they see the phrase, “According to a poll from Zogby Interactive…” and yet, yesterday, I couldn’t believe the commotion caused by a poll that obviously didn’t make any sense.

About 24 hours ago, Zogby Interactive released a national poll showing John Edwards and Barack Obama leading each of the top five Republican presidential hopefuls in a hypothetical general-election match-up. The same poll, however, showed Hillary Clinton trailing the same five candidates (even Romney and Huckabee, who usually fare poorly due to low national name recognition).

As it turns out, this was just the tip of the iceberg. Blogs jumped on the poll results, as did all of the cable news networks.

Around the same time, Gallup released a similar poll, gauging the results of match-ups of the top two Dems against the top four Republicans. These results were in line with reality — Dems up, GOP down.

Take a wild guess which of these two polls sparked a mini media frenzy.

Of course, every political reporter, editor, and producer in the country knew that Zogby Interactive results were unreliable, but they trumpeted the results anyway.

There’s probably more than one explanation of this, but I suspect the Zogby Interactive data was what I think of as an IKI Poll — “I knew it” poll.

For a couple of years now, when rumors that Hillary Clinton would run first emerged (say, around 2006), the conventional wisdom as that she would struggle in a general-election campaign. Sure, she could win in the primaries, but she would fare poorly against a Republican nominee.

And ever since, all the data has shown otherwise. Indeed, all year long, poll after poll showed Clinton leading the GOP field in hypothetical match-ups. The predictions weren’t playing out, at least not yet.

And then along comes the Zogby Interactive poll, which, wouldn’t you know it, offered numbers that were exactly in line with what the chattering class has expected for a year. “A ha!” said reports. “I knew it!”

The media wanted a poll that confirmed pre-existing suspicions. In this case, the fact that the results didn’t make any sense was apparently not much of a concern.

Wouldn’t responsible journalism require news outlets to a) note why professional pollsters discount Zogby Interactive data; and b) also highlight the Gallup numbers with equal enthusiasm?

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/13731.html

I mean that must be why they all jumped on the Gallup data and ignored the Zogby "online activists only" poll!

I was gonna post that subject line!

You just dashed the false hopes of the anti-Hillary crusaders. How dare you give them a dose of reality like that when they were having so much fun. :evilgrin:

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1064

...."As the election drew near, Pollster Zogby was quoted widely saying that he believed the Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives would pick up between 25 and 30 seats, and that Democrats would almost certainly pick up three or four seats in the Senate, and perhaps get as high as six. As in earlier elections, Zogby’s estimates turned out to be right on the mark.


Another bright spot for Zogby came from its online polling division, Zogby Interactive, which correctly identified the winners in 18 of 19 Senate races. And the only race that Zogby did not pick correctly – the McCaskill/Talent race in Missouri – was still well within the margin of error. Zogby Interactive had Talent winning re–election by a single percentage point, instead of losing by 2%.


This separate polling methodology, under research and development at Zogby since 1998, showed particular value in mapping close contests – it correctly identified the winners in four of the five races that were won by single digits (the McCaskill race being the exception). Taking into consideration the last–minute twists and turns that took place in that race after the Zogby Interactive poll left the field, its result was remarkably precise...."

I think it is a cheap shot to dismiss this poll as if it were the type of "internet poll" we see on CNN, etc where people can vote multiple times. The methodology is way different, and apparently it has had a good track record so far.

Zogby is a respected pollster. I think it is deplorable how people have jumped to the conclusion that this was a "bogus poll". I suspect that is because some don't like the outcome.

So, go ahead and flame me. But at least read the methodology you are talking about....