polling

Ron Paul has been cleaning up the youth vote - but did you notice that the polls in the days leading up to the Iowa Caucus and the New Hampshire Primary were a little.... what's the technical term...? Off? Wrong? Skewed? It turns out that polls all significantly under-sampled young voters.

According to a report from Stefan Hankin from Campaigns and Elections Magazine

"The miss on the Paul numbers is a bit troubling. When looking at the polling firms that release their demographics, it is clear that younger voters were under sampled. In the last Suffolk Poll, under 35s were at 7.6 percent; PPP had under 30s at 10 percent. Moreover, both these firms were also off on the sampling of independent voters. PPP had independents at 37 percent and Suffolk had them at 40 percent."

If you're a regular reader of FM then you know this is typical. The loudest example was a CNN poll that didn't sample enough young people to get an accurate number so for young people they just put N/A. Many times polling firms will use "likely voters" and since most pollsters are aging politicos who still operate under the assumption that young people don't vote... a large sample of the 18-29 year old demographic doesn't make it into the polling models. The other major problem is that most polling firms use land lines to contact potential voters. Young people don't really use landlines... and that's becoming increasingly the case.

As the 2012 election season ramps up, let this be a reminder that most polls are going to ignore young people. This is not at all a valid reflection of the overall electorate. We've proven that young people can make a difference in the election if we're mobilized and unified around a candidate or an issue. Ignore the youth vote at your own peril.

Crossposted from OurTime.Org

Mark Blumenthal has a piece up at the Huffington Post about our campaign against what we called the Bad CNN Polls.

After explaining the situation and the campaign Our Time launched to hold CNN accountable, he said this whole debacle comes down to two questions.

First, why are CNN's pollsters having so much trouble reaching younger Americans? Second, does it matter that CNN's landline sample misses so many younger Americans that it has to weight the youngest age group up by a factor of at least three?

The answer to the first question is easy: CNN's unweighted poll was light on younger Americans because their sample covered only households with a landline telephone. As documented by the National Center for Health Statistics, the percentage of American households with a cellphone but no landline telephone service has been steadily rising over the last ten years, especially among younger Americans. As of last year, 24.9 percent of all adults have wireless service only, but among those aged 25 to 29 years that number is now more than half -- 51.3 percent. . .

The second question -- can CNN factor in its lack of young adults? -- is tougher. The answer, according to the available data, is that demographic weighting alone does not entirely make up for its missing cellphone-only respondents.

The best support for this conclusion comes from a series of studies involving parallel surveys using dual samples of both landline and mobile phones. Pew Research, which conducted the surveys, has produced a series of reports since 2007 comparing the weighted results obtained by combining landline and mobile phone samples with those obtained from landline calling only."

There's a whole lot more to read over at HuffPo - check it out and sign the petition to hold CNN accountable!

Yes, it's that time of year again, where the Bill O'Reillys of the world decide to get all sanctimonious on us (okay, so maybe that's more than one time a year), admonishing us for erasing Christmas from pop culture.

This year, though, we have some interesting data on what people really prefer, broken down by age. It turns out that the only age group showing a majority of people who actually care about what greeting they receive is the 65+ demographic.

Let me accentuate that nearly 60 percent of 18-29 year olds polled don't give a damn what people say.

Must be that whole diversity thing.

We have discussed the short shrift Millennials get in traditional polling operations due to their cell phone-only tendencies, but here is a CDC report that underscores it:

In a first for any age group, more than half of Americans age 25-29 live in households with cell phones but no traditional landline telephones.

A report on phone use by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also found that the younger children are, the likelier they are to live in homes that only have wireless phones. That suggests that younger parents are showing increasing comfort relying only on cell phones even as they adjust from being single to a more settled family lifestyle, according to one of the report's authors.

Of course, given Millennials' Democratic tendencies, failing to take them into account in campaign polling operations leads to an increasing GOP bias, as this Daily Kos diary discussed in October.

Some other data from the study, conducted by CDC's National
Center for Health Statistics:

• The households likeliest to rely only on wireless phones consist of adults who are poor, renters, Hispanics or who live with unrelated housemates.
• Only 13 percent of households have landlines and no cell phones — down from 24 percent in early 2007.
• Though people age 18-29 are the heaviest cell phone users, they comprise only 40 percent of all wireless-only adults. That's because young adults make up only about one-fifth of the total adult population.
• Only 16 percent of Northeasterners live in cell phone-only homes, the lowest of any region. The highest frequency of wireless-only households is in the South, where 29 percent live that way.
• About 2 percent of households have no phone service at all, a figure that has changed little in recent years.

As we move forward toward the 2012 race, I suspect we'll be seeing even larger numbers of Millennial cell phone-only households.

From the "you don't say" file:

Republicans received a boost over Democrats in landline-only telephone polls, according to a new study by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center.

Polls this fall that reached only landline phone numbers ended up giving Republicans an extra five percentage points compared with polls that dialed both landline and mobile phones, the study concluded. Pew said that’s because almost a quarter of U.S. homes don’t have a landline telephone number, and cell phone users tend to be younger and more Democratic.

This serves as a reminder to be especially critical of polls purporting to measure any kind of reality while failing to allow for representation of cell phone-only households in its results. Given the tendency of youth to forego landlines, we'd be doing ourselves a disservice to continue to peddle the polling garbage that is landline-only surveys.

Originally posted at Citizen Orange.

The fate of almost a million lives could be decided in the next six hours.  As a voter, as a millenial, as a migrant, as a Guatemalan, I'm writing to say that I will be watching along with the vast majority of those who will determine the future of the United States of America. 

If you already haven't heard already, Harry Reid is going to offer the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act up as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act.  The Senate is scheduled to vote on taking up the Act tomorrow at 2:15 p.m.  If you haven't called you're Senator yet in the support of the DREAM Act please do so now by calling:

It is imperative that you focus on these Senators.  If you've called already, call again.  If you've called again, ask five friends to do the same.  If you've done all that, here are some more actions you can take.

If you haven't heard about the DREAM Act yet I wouldn't be surprised.  The media has largely been focused on the train wreck that is Christine O'Donnell's campaign.  But the mainstream media is missing out on one of the most suspenseful political dramas I've ever witnessed.  No one knows if we have the votes to beat the filibuster in the Senate, today.  If we don't beat it, the National Defense Authorization Act will likely have to wait until after the elections.  At that point, all bets are off. 

One of the most compelling elements of this political drama has been the interaction between The LGBT movement and the migrant youth movement.  What to an outsider might be perceived as two unrelated constituencies, perhaps even hostile to each other, have been working long before this moment to build unity and solidarity.  It is one thing to believe in the truth that we are all woven into a "single garment of destiny."  It is another to live that truth and act on it.  The migrant youth movement and the LGBT movement having been living and acting on that truth, as we all should.  My freedom is tied up with the freedom of everyone else in the universe, and tomorrow we have a chance to set close to a million people free. 

Again, the media hasn't been watching but everyone who matters everyone who will decide the future of this country is watching.  The DREAM Act has been front-page news on major Spanish language newspapers all week, and featured heavily on Spanish language television.  The U.S.'s largest and fastest growing minority, Latinos, is watching, today.  Educators and students from around the country have organized for and come out in support of the DREAM Act.  The next generation is watching, today.  Facebook and twitter have blown up with mentions of the DREAM Act, and traffic on the sites covering the DREAM Act is through the roof.  Business leaders, religious leaders, and military leaders have all come out strong in support of the DREAM Act.  If the Senate fails to move the DREAM Act forward today, we will all be watching and we won't just remember this November, but for the rest of our lives. 

The next generation isn't just watching whether the DREAM act will move forward, but whether the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell (DADT) will move forward.  Lady Gaga has galvanized youth for the repeal of DADT with her extensive twitter and facebook following in a way that probably hasn't been seen seen Barack Obama was elected.

According to a poll commissioned by First Focus, 70% of the U.S. public supports the DREAM Act.  Multiple polls show that a majority of the U.S. public supports the repeal of DADT.  Republicans, for the most part, are floating arguments about procedure.  They are saying that Democrats are playing politics with the National Defense Authorization Act.  Republicans are playing politics, too, and have used the procedure of the filibuster to grind the Senate to a halt for two years.  Playing politics is what politicians do.  The public doesn't care about politicians playing politics or what procedures are used as long as Congress does their job and gets things done.  It's time for Congress to get two things done that the majority of Americans support. 

Republicans, especially, face an important choice, today.  They can please their increasingly regional extremist base and relegate themselves to irrelevancy for a generation, or they can do the right thing and be competitive with the next generation of voters.

If we win, today, we will face an even steeper uphill battle, but we will all be watching.  Failure has not entered into my mind.  We will pass the DREAM Act and DADT will be repealed.  It is no longer a question of if, but a question of when.  The time is now and whomever stands in the way will regret it for a long time. 

I've not been shy about critiquing those who work in journalism within the Beltway for getting lost in their bubble. Many times these journalists will construct realities or political narratives that don't exist or simply aren't true in the rest of the country.

We should first distinguish between the prognosticators who make the stuff up, and the reporters who objectively report the bullshit.

We have an example of the former today, as David Broder argues that Sarah Palin should be taken seriously. Calling Palin "a public figure at the top of her game -- a politician who knows who she is and how to sell herself," Broder paints Palin as a populist hero, someone capable of leading the romanticized teabaggers to a climactic victory over the oppressive government and Glenn Beck-haters everywhere.

So epic!

Broder might want to revisit populism's root word and his newspaper's polling operation, though. Unfortunately for Palin and Broder, people aren't buying it. Not even the GOP. So says the Washington Post.

Although Palin is a tea party favorite, her potential as a presidential hopeful takes a severe hit in the survey. Fifty-five percent of Americans have unfavorable views of her, while the percentage holding favorable views has dipped to 37, a new low in Post-ABC polling.

There is a growing sense that the former Alaska governor is not qualified to serve as president, with more than seven in 10 Americans now saying she is unqualified, up from 60 percent in a November survey. Even among Republicans, a majority now say Palin lacks the qualifications necessary for the White House.

Palin has lost ground among conservative Republicans, who would be crucial to her hopes if she seeks the party's presidential nomination in 2012. Forty-five percent of conservatives now consider her as qualified for the presidency, down sharply from 66 percent who said so last fall.

Among all Republicans polled, 37 percent now hold a "strongly favorable" opinion of Palin, about half the level recorded when she burst onto the national stage in 2008 as Sen. John McCain's running mate.

Keep in mind this is all after Palin's spike in visibility.

I'm not sure how this developed in Broder's brain, but the evidence is clear -- people (even conservatives) aren't buying into Palin's message. It's unfortunate that Broder continues to be one of the leading voices in Washington punditry.

This week's DailyKos/Research 2000 poll examined beliefs and political philosophies of republican voters. Nate Silver from 538 has an interesting take on it:

"This accounts for what might be the Republicans' greatest strength as we head into the November midterms as well as their greatest liability. The strength is that they can somewhat comfortably adopt a nationalized, one-size-fits-all message. They don't have to worry about the constellation of constituencies that Democrats have: labor voters, Baby-boomer liberals, blacks, Hispanics, college-educated technocrats, libertarianish younger voters, etc. Their base is the same pretty much everywhere, and actuating a strategy that appeals to that base is not challenging.

The liability, meanwhile, is that while the Republican base might be the same pretty much everywhere, the rest of the electorate isn't. Some states and districts have different ratios of Republicans to Democratic and independent voters. Moreover, they have different types of Democratic and independent voters, some of whom may be amenable to the Republican message and others of whom won't be."

Notable graphs where 18-29 year old voters differed the most from other age demographics:

This week NPR also did a report about young voters and the Teabagger movement.

"Mr. JORDAN MARKS (Executive Director, Americans for Freedom): I personally went and interviewed young Democrats that had spent a lot of time on his campaign to figure out what they had done differently.

GONYEA: But beyond the Internet, conservatives say their basic message is now getting more traction. As president, Barack Obama now has a record and conservatives say theres reason for young voters to start to scrutinize what hes accomplished.

Twenty-six-year-old Ashley Sewell of the group Smart Girl Politics says recent college graduates are facing a brutal job market. She says 20-somethigns are worried and that provides an opening.

Ms. ASHLEY SEWELL (Smart Girl Politics): I think so, primarily because the conservative movement has really started to gain some traction. And I think that were starting to gain some legitimacy in the conversation.

GONYEA: Professor Peter Levine runs a nonpartisan program at Tufts University specializing in politics and young people.

Professor PETER LEVINE (Director, CIRCLE; Civic Studies, Tufts University): So I don't think the fact that they would be enthusiastic about Barack Obama in 2008 would guarantee that they would continue to feel that way. Theyre faced with a lot of things, including a very high unemployment rate. And it would be easy for them to change their mind about the effectiveness of government. "

Gonyea goes on to say that Levine describes young voters as being more liberal than the US as a whole and when conservatives spend too much time on issues like gay marriage it works against them.

The Harvard Institute of Politics has released their latest round of youth polling. The numbers are already being headlined that youth still support Barack Obama even as they disapprove of his policy goals. Nowhere is this dynamic more visible than healthcare. Polling this year has repeatedly shown youth to be among the most favorable constituencies for health reform -- no surprise given how many young Americans are uninsured.

Forward Montana, the young voter organization I helped found in 2004, made health care a priority in 2007 after our members and volunteers told us loudly that the issue was a priority for them.

So what happened? The answer, based on the data, is extremely unclear. Despite disapproving of Barack Obama's efforts on health care (44-52), the reality is that young people overwhelmingly support they components of reform:

• 60% favor requiring individuals have health insurance provided low-income Americans receive assistance to help pay for premiums.
• 57% support a public option to compete with private insurance companies.
• 76% want health insurance companies to be required to extend coverage to Americans with pre-existing conditions.
• 63% favor an employer mandate.
• 59% want to fund the system through a surtax on wealthy Americans.

So where's the objection? Good question. It may be the speed with which Congress has tackled the problem. It may be that Republican misinformation is playing a role (Dick Morris is bragging about successfully turning young people agains health reform after all). It may be something else. Frankly, the data set is too limited to tell.

What do you think?

This week's Daily Kos tracking poll provided a sign that we are in for a very rocky midterm election if the once-formidable Obama coalition doesn't assemble.

Voter Intensity: Definitely + Probably Voting/Not Likely + Not Voting

Republican Voters: 81/14
Independent Voters: 65/23
DEMOCRATIC VOTERS: 56/40

Yes, Republicans are naturally going to be more enthusiastic about voting now, just like Democrats were when W was in office. But this should be a huge warning sign, especially to those of us working with young voters, which are becoming the heart and soul of the Democratic Party.