The Daily Widget – Thursday, July 10 – Obama 366, McCain 172 – About “Zogby Interactive” Polls

Zogby released a huge batch of state polls yesterday that were taken via online survey. So that we may have our terminology straight, Zogby Interactive is the online polling method established by Zogby International. This batch of state polls was conducted online for 34 different states between June 11 and June 30 (median date June 21).

View the data for all 34 of Zogby Interactive’s state polls at FiveThirtyEight.com.

According to their website, this is how the online polling method works:



What is the usefulness of these polls? Zogby calculates the margin of error for each “interactive” poll to be between 2% and 5%, but they neglect to consider in their margins of error that this type of polling is strictly “members only” … You must register, and in order to participate, you must own a computer (or have a computer available) and an internet connection and an email address.

Do you know of another organization that allows people to participate in polls as long as they are members, with a computer, and with online access? I do. Democratic Underground. :7

These interactive polls do have one thing going for them … they are better than outdated polls. Even an interactive poll is better than no poll at all, and an outdated poll is equivalent to no poll. So I’ll use these polls only in extreme circumstances, but with zero weight. Only four of the 34 polls meet these criteria, since the previous outdated polls for these states were from February 28 (AR, IL), April 3 (MD) and June 2 (SC). If any of these polls change a state from one color to the other on the map (which it did for Arkansas and South Carolina), I’ll show a disclaimer below the map. New polls for these four states will be released soon and will replace these mostly useless interactive polls.

The polls released since yesterday:
Arkansas – Obama 41, McCain 39, Barr 4, Nader 1 (Zogby Interactive, 6/21, +/- 4.7, 461 LV) (Replaces outdated poll from February 28)
Illinois – Obama 52, McCain 32, Barr 5, Nader 1 (Zogby Interactive, 6/21, +/- 2.6, 1514 LV) (Replaces outdated poll from February 28)
Maryland – Obama 54, McCain 30, Barr 6, Nader 1 (Zogby Interactive, 6/21, +/- 3.3, 924 LV) (Replaces outdated poll from April 3)
South Carolina – Obama 42, McCain 41, Barr 6, Nader 1 (Zogby Interactive, 6/21, +/- 4.0, 630 LV) (Replaces outdated poll from June 2)
Missouri – Obama 45, McCain 50 (Rasmussen, 7/7, +/- 4.5, 500 LV)
Missouri – Obama 44, McCain 47 (Public Policy Polling, 7/5, +/- 3.6, 723 LV)
New Jersey – Obama 47, McCain 44 (Rasmussen, 7/7, +/- 4.5, 500 LV)
Kansas – Obama 36, McCain 49 (TargetPoint-R, 7/1, +/- 2.0, 3004 RV)
Alabama – Obama 36.4, McCain 48.8 (AEA/Capital Survey, 7/1, +/- 4.3, 536 LV)



^ This is what we refer to as the “Widget”. In the white section, it shows Obama’s and McCain’s electoral vote projection from three different sources. 270 would be a majority. In the yellow section, it shows three sources of trading and averages for the candidates. The scale for these is 0 to 100, with 50 being a majority. Intrade shows the trading, while RCP-av shows the aggregate average of all the state polls. The Wigand Electoral Average is our own indicator, and shows how the candidates will do if the undecideds nationwide break the same way as the swing states.



^ The Wigand Electoral Average is our own indicator, and shows how the candidates will do if the undecideds nationwide break the same way as the swing states. Each of the twelve swing states are listed below the indicator’s current score. The closing figures on Intrade are shown next to each state, with a column to show the change from the previous day. The scale for these is 0 to 100, with 50 being a majority.


* * * * * * *


DAILY TRACKING



^ This graph shows the daily tracking of Obama’s projected electoral votes from three sources. 270 is a majority of the electoral votes. The blue line shows daily tracking from 538.com, which projects what the outcome should be on election day. The red line shows daily tracking from Electoral-Vote.com, which shows a current snapshot of Obama’s electoral progress if the undecideds break evenly. The green line is my own projection, and it shows a current snapshot of Obama’s electoral progress if the undecideds break the same way as the swing states. A trend line is used (dashed green line) to show the average progress since May 19 and possible route for the next seven days.



^ This graph shows Obama’s green line and red line from the previous graph, and compares it to John Kerry’s 2004 progress (orange line) as shown from Electoral-Vote.com. (Both the red line and the orange line show data from Electoral-Vote.com)



^ Wigand vs. National Polls. The Wigand Electoral Average uses both poll averages and trading (swing states), and this graph compares it to the national tracking polls from Gallup, Rasmussen and Real Clear Politics (average).



^ This graph shows the daily tracking of the swing states total from the Wigand Electoral Average widget above (second chart from the top). The scale is 0 to 1200, with 600 being a majority. It is currently at 671.70 (the highest it has ever been). To show Obama’s progress in the swing states, divide the latest closing figure (671.70) by 1200. Obama is winning the swing states by 55.98%, compared to 44.02% for McCain.



^ Wigand vs. Trading. The Wigand Electoral Average uses both poll averages and trading (swing states), and this graph compares it to the closing trading figures from Intrade (people buying shares with real money) and Rasmussen Markets (people using fake money).



^ I am projecting 126,750,000 million votes on election day, which is the total 2004 votes plus population growth for each state. A total projected popular vote is calculated for each candidate based on projected votes on election day this year multiplied by each state’s current poll results. This graph shows the daily tracking of the popular vote calculations.



^ This graph shows the daily tracking of each swing state’s closing figure on Intrade. The scale is 0 to 100 with 50 being a majority. I commonly refer to the range from 40.00 to 60.00 as “The Zone” because the states in The Zone are true swing states this year.


* * * * * * *



(Disclaimer: The polls from Arkansas and South Carolina were
conducted by “Zogby Interactive” and should be given zero weight.)


Yesterday’s Widget
Full Weekly Tracking
Past editions of THE MATH

Sources:
Pollster.com
FiveThirtyEight.com
Electoral-Vote.com
Intrade
Rasmussen Markets
RCP Average
RCP Latest Polls



As always, I’m open to your feedback and suggestions, and I will be happy to explain anything!

Feel free to use these charts and graphs anywhere on Democratic Underground.

Donate to the Obama Campaign today through DU’s donation link at Barack Obama’s website:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/outreach/view/main/du

Morning! knr.:hi:

:donut: Good morning, tek! :hi:

Busy Thursday. Enjoy your day!

Checked in to see if you stopped by for lunch. :hi:

Thanks for kicking the widget for me today :) :hi:

Relax and have a nice dinner. :hi:

S.O. and I are having "Bachelor Chow" tonight ... whatever we can find in the fridge. :7

It's either that or delivery, lol

And thanks.

No way Jersey is that close. It never is. I do hope McSame's camp is stupid enough to think it's competitive and sinks much $ into that high dollar media market.

Then another agency will release a poll showing NJ as Obama greater than 10. :crazy:

Message to McSame: We're worried we might lose New Jersey! Spend money there! We're desperate!

:rofl:

Thanks jd! :hi:

Missed you again this morning.

I don't like Zogby that much. I know that it is hard for many here to believe, but I have a lot of friends both here and in NY that *gasp* don't have computers. For that reason I don't think their polls are very reliable. A lot of my friends just go to the library and use computers there, but not on a consistent enough basis to complete surveys. However, they will be going to vote in November. I do understand what you are saying about their polls being better than outdated ones.

Hope your day is a good one. :hi:

You're right, some folks don't have computers, and some with computers aren't self-confident enough to use them for polls. There's a learning curve involved, and that in itself skews the results.

:hi:

with a wealth of detail on depth of support

it also shows that Obama has made signficiant strides on moving Clinton supporters to his camp but that some have yet to join.


http://people-press.org/report/436/obama-mccain-july

63% overall are more interested in this election than they were in the 2004 election. (71% for Democrats!)

Check this part out ... "Very/Fairly Satisfied with the Candidates":
Republicans 2008 - 49%
Democrats 2008 - 74%

:rofl:

Thanks for linking this, it's definitely worth a good read.

when I posted the Zogby to the thread yesterday I was not aware that there polls were basically open to anyone to join.

How is that kind of poll better than an old poll?

While it might be useful in confirming other trends should it really be used to turn a red state blue like Arkansas or South Carolina?

that seems to give it too much weight.


I do find one thing interesting and that is their relatively high 'undecided' rate. Why would they gt 10% undecided when people are signing up to be heard?

Although I find the 10% undecided to probably be pretty realistic of the actual feeling in the country right now.

I still haven't heard back from them regarding whether I was accepted or not.

The second page of their registration questionnaire asks about a dozen personal questions, mostly about race, gender, education, income, etc. One of the questions asked was "Do you belong to a Union?" I wonder why that question would be relevant. Maybe they deny registrations based on that info?

They also ask about your general political view on a scale something like this:
Conservative
Moderate
Liberal
Very liberal/Progressive

:rofl:

"Progressive" is defined as extreme-left, according to Zogby. But they didn't have an extreme-right classification, such as "Fucktard."

Regarding the relative usefulness of interactive polls compared to outdated polls, more recent interactive polls (although skewed) help with the trend lines in today's 6-hour news cycle world. Although the data for South Carolina and Arkansas were used, they were given zero weight, and the resulting change in the electoral vote projection for Obama was +1 (it moved from 365 to 366). If given proper weight, the two states' electoral votes would have increased Obama's projection by +14.

The weight of the outdated polls reaches zero after 35 days anyway. The effective change is basically same weight, newer numbers.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6474175&mesg_id=6483140

I wonder where they got it from lol

That should rabble-rouse the republicans into action in Arizona! Maybe they'll become desperate enough to buy airtime there, lol

I go from wanting to divorce Rasmussen to wanting to marry him

North Dakota is now tied

North Dakota is as safe a Republican state as any in Presidential elections. George W. Bush carried the state by twenty-seven points in Election 2004 and twenty-eight points four years earlier. The state has voted for a Democratic Presidential candidate just once since 1936 and three times since 1916.

Despite that history, John McCain and Barack Obama are tied in the latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of North Dakota voters. Both men earn 43% of the vote.



http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/north_dakota/election_2008_north_dakota_presidential_election

I think he felt the heat for releasing polls with very high undecideds, lol. The North Dakota margin you mentioned (tied 43-43) is without leaners. With leaners, McCain is leading Obama by 47% to 46%.

From what I've heard, Rasmussen was the only pollster still releasing polls without leaners. Everyone else gave up on that practice a long time ago. I'm happy to see that explode in his face! :7

Like you implied, you might as well include a poll of DUers from the outdated states then.

The weight of the outdated polls reaches zero after 35 days anyway. The effective change is basically same weight as the outdated polls, but newer numbers (for the popular vote projection). Although the data for South Carolina and Arkansas were used, they were given zero weight, and the resulting change in the electoral vote projection for Obama was +1 (it moved from 365 to 366). If given proper weight, the two states' electoral votes would have increased Obama's projection by +14.

30 of the 34 polls didn't even meet the needed criteria. The good thing is that these four interactive polls won't be in the mix for long. Rasmussen released a poll today for Illinois, replacing one of the four interactive polls used with zero weight.

:hi:

And no one takes them seriously.

Also, their rating from this primary season from fivethirtyeight.com


http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/search/label/pollster%20ratings

FiveThirtyEight.com really has their act together! One of my favorite daily reads.

FiveThirtyEight used all 34 of the Zogby Interactive polls, but with a minimal 0.25 weight. I used only 4 of the Zogby Interactive polls, but with a 0.00 weight. The ones I used replace long outdated polls from months ago when the primary was still going on.

Using these four polls with zero weight doesn't affect the electoral vote projection at all. It only affects the popular vote projection, but not by much.

Other than that, I don't trust 'em. :hi:

:hi:

Illinois included. Good post, gc!

Still looking good.

Might we turn Arizona into a shade of blue?

"Miles to go before..."

overconfidence.

Still wondering about SC and AR

33 Zogby State Polls were used in TIA's State Model to arrive at 363EV @50% UVA scenario, and your widget finds agreement in TIA's 2008 EM State model.

So, "where's the beef" with Zogby? ;)


Is your Wigand 56.88% a vote share or a win probability?

If it's a win probability -- and with your EV total at 366 (only 270 to win) -- a number very close to 100% should be expected.
If it's a vote share, then shouldn't 56.88% Obama correspond closer to 500 electoral votes? (See here)