SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Demographics Don't Explain Fundamentally Different Views Of...

ELECTIONATE NOVEMBER 2, 2012

Demographics Don't Explain Fundamentally Different Views Of The Race

Several reporters armed with quotes from campaign sources say that Democratic and Republican private pollsters are expecting fundamentally different outcomes, with Republicans faring far better in their own surveys than public polls. According to these reports, the differences are related to the composition of the electorate.

Democratic pollsters apparently assume that the non-white share of the electorate will increase from 2008, while the GOP pollsters apparently believe that the non-white share of the electorate will stay steady. Both sides apparently believe African American turnout will remain at ’08 levels, but Democratic and Republican pollsters disagree about young and Latino voters.

There is a very reasonable debate to be had about whether turnout among these groups will rise, hold, or fall in 2012. But if, in fact, partisan private pollsters hold fundamentally different views of the race, disagreements over the composition of electorate alone can't account for them.

Take the most recent Pew Research survey, which shows seniors supporting Romney by 19 points while Obama leads by 21 among 18-29 year olds. If young voters drop from 18 to 15 percent of the electorate while seniors increase from 16 to 19 percent, Romney would gain a net of 1.4 points.

Will that make a difference in a close race? Absolutely. But could a 1.4 point gap cover the difference between private pollsters showing both Obama and Romney with clear leads? I doubt it. Two points worth of Latino turnout can’t explain a fundamental difference in the state of the race either, at least outside of Colorado, Nevada, and Florida. It certainly couldn't explain a big difference in Wisconsin, Ohio, and Iowa, and if the Republican pollsters don’t disagree with the Democrats in those states, then it’s not clear that their disagreement really matters. 

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 2 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

2 comments

All one needs to know is that the NYC mayor endorsed Obama yesterday. There's no way he would have if he and his advisers had not concluded that Obama will win - and they concluded Obama will win not by a hunch but by polling data that they have access to. As mayor of a devastated city, he needs the support of the president. And after endorsing Obama, he could not expect the support of President Romney.

- rayward

November 2, 2012 at 12:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Sure, conservative and moderate pollsters expect different outcomes. Conservative pollsters expect conservative outcomes. While moderate pollsters are trying to find out what the truth is. Conservatives are trying to filter out what they perceive as a liberal bias in reality. But it's their perception which is skewed, not reality. The difference is explained in the Republican tendency to ask questions in ways that favor positions they already hold -- not really in differences of the electorate.

- AllanL5

November 2, 2012 at 3:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close