Kohut’s Op-Ed Piece

Legacy blog posts Uncategorized

Since my email box was chock full of forwarded copies of Andrew Kohut’s op-ed piece on polling in this morning’s New York Times, I thought I would blog it. Among other things, he chimes in on the debate over the incumbent rule and alternative theories:

One piece of received wisdom is that the swing voters will ultimately break for Mr. Kerry. The argument goes something like this: These voters know George Bush and are unhappy with his performance and the state of the nation. It is therefore hard to imagine that they will stick with him. Well, there is a wealth of data showing that swing voters – who still constitute 14 percent of likely voters – think all these things and are still lukewarm about Mr. Kerry, particularly his ability to handle the war on terrorism.

Another common assumption is that voters will not switch horses when the country is facing an overseas threat and has troops are in the field. Despite his anemic approval rating of 47 percent, Mr. Bush will hang on because uncommitted voters will not put the country at risk. No wartime president has lost a re-election bid, those who argue this position add. This just might be so, but we’re not living through World War II or Vietnam. Right now, there are plenty of swing voters who give higher priority to domestic issues (where Mr. Kerry is strong) than to security issues.

It’s hard to argue, as seems to feel strongly both ways.

Kohut’s lead will provoke a bit more debate. He explains that voter volatility is the reason “polls are not going to give us a clear picture” of the outcome. “This is not because polling no longer works – it’s because voter opinion is highly unstable.”

While I agree that polling still works, that voter opinion can be unstable and that cross-pressured swing voters still exist, I am not sure we can ignore the volatility in some likely voter models. Emory Professor Alan Abramowitz emails with a valid counterpoint:

The problem is that poll results are volatile due to the effects of sampling error, differences in weighting procedures, and different methods of identifying likely voters. As a result, even polls conducted at exactly the same time can produce divergent results. Nor is this situation unique to the 2004 election. The same volatility was evident prior to the 2000 election when, for example, the Gallup tracking poll released on October 26 showed George Bush leading Al Gore by 13 points while the Zogby tracking poll released the same day showed Gore leading Bush by 2 points. [Note to Abramowitz: You really should blog this stuff!]

Another good tease to the upcoming discussion of likely voter models. [If I were a certain well known blogger, a mysterious yet imaginary “editor” might now suddenly appear and ask, Didn’t you promise that five days ago?—ed. I’m working on it. I’m working on it!!]

Mark Blumenthal

Mark Blumenthal is political pollster with deep and varied experience across survey research, campaigns, and media. The original "Mystery Pollster" and co-creator of Pollster.com, he explains complex concepts to a multitude of audiences and how data informs politics and decision-making. A researcher and consultant who crafts effective questions and identifies innovative solutions to deliver results. An award winning political journalist who brings insights and crafts compelling narratives from chaotic data.