[DMR] Varying scenarios, varying results

[kylejack]

hxxp://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/12/31/varying-scenarios-varying-results/

Most troubling part:

DEMOCRATS — Our poll methodology relies on sampling only from registered Republicans and independents. We’ve elected to exclude registered Democrats because of the cost of interviewing the small numbers of Democrats likely to attend a Republican caucus, with little expected influence on the final outcome.

However, a pollster does not want a method that blinds her to change when it happens. People who are registered Democrats today could turn up on caucus night, change their registration and have their votes counted.

So, we conducted an experiment during the first two nights of interviewing. We mounted a separate study to gauge the likely incidence of registered Democrats intending to caucus for the Republicans and to look at their candidate preference. On both nights, we found the incidence to be 3 percent. That is, of 200 conversations with registered Democrats, just six said they would definitely or probably attend the Republican caucuses. That is statistically too few to have measurable impact, unless the race is tight and all these registered Democrats opt for the same candidate.

This is the most fascinating part of our test. Each of the six had a different candidate preference: one each for Gingrich, Huntsman, Paul, Perry and Romney, and one for “other.” Only Bachmann and Santorum fail to attract one of the six votes.

People who love politics love this kind of surprise battle, where there is a path to victory for a number of candidates.

 

[nyrgoal99]

Interesting

 

[parocks]

They ONLY TALKED TO REGISTERED VOTERS. Not New Voters, young people, our strength. They're using a registered voters list. not calling randomly and getting people who are planning on voting for the first time for Ron Paul. And we are strong with 18-29.

 

[Student Of Paulism]

Pff...well if that is true, that is just...um...Pretty damn horrible, no way to slice it otherwise. So now this makes us wonder how many the dems that PPP is polling is just garbage support now that wont show up on caucus night....blah. Honestly, can it get any worse?

They ONLY TALKED TO REGISTERED VOTERS. Not New Voters, young people, our strength. They're using a registered voters list. not calling randomly and getting people who are planning on voting for the first time for Ron Paul. And we are strong with 18-29.

Yea, that's uhh, really not that much better. People who are registered have more of an incentive to go out and vote, than someone who never has. I mean, yea, i get the fact you gotta take the plunge at some point, but people tend to be lazy now and then. Ones who never voted before are definitely going to be much less proactive and the 'fuck it' attitude is more prevalent.

 

[kylejack]

Pff...well if that is true, that is just...um...Pretty damn horrible, no way to slice it otherwise. So now this makes us wonder how many the dems that PPP is polling is just garbage support now that wont show up on caucus night....blah. Honestly, can it get any worse?

Seems to me that we need a massive turnout. Hopefully the call the campaign sends out on caucus day will be highly effective. Hell, if we've got 500 volunteers in-state, why not have them make a personal call to each identified Ron Paul voter? 20,000 identified according to the campaign, so that's 40 calls for each volunteer. We win! Maybe.

 

[DRV45N05]

There is no way that you can assert that the Democratic vote will be evenly split among six candidates based on interviewing just 6 LV Democrats. That is WAY too few. You need to interview more Democrats to get a more accurate picture about where they're going- which is what PPP does.

 

[kylejack]

There is no way that you can assert that the Democratic vote will be evenly split among six candidates based on interviewing just 6 LV Democrats. That is WAY too few. You need to interview more Democrats to get a more accurate picture about where they're going- which is what PPP does.

Right, and I don't think DMR is saying that's authoritative. The larger point is that only 3% of Democrats intend to caucus.