Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid gives a victory speech during a Democratic election party Tuesday at Aria.
By J. Patrick Coolican (contact) 
Sunday, Nov. 7, 2010 | 2 a.m.
Sun archives
- Election polls under scrutiny after missing mark (11-4-2010)
- Poll shows Angle, Reid close in Nevada Senate race (10-29-2010)
- Jon Ralston: The consequences of flawed public polling (10-8-2010)
- Harry Reid inching ahead of Sharron Angle, new poll finds (9-25-2010)
- Polls: Harry Reid grabs lead over Sharron Angle (7-16-2010)
- Poll: Either GOP challenger could topple Harry Reid (8-23-2009)
- Margin of error is polls’ fine print (10-14-2008)
All the late public polling in the race between Sen. Harry Reid and his Republican challenger Sharron Angle turned out to be wrong, including the Las Vegas Review-Journal’s final Mason-Dixon poll that had Angle up 49-45. Reid won by 5.
But Reid pollster Mark Mellman nailed it. Just as he did in the California and West Virginia Senate races.
How did he do it? And what was wrong with the public polls?
Mellman was kind of enough to take some time last week to walk me through it, and here are the key points:
• Pollsters too often subscribe to the “likely voter” fallacy. They seek out likely voters by asking them questions about their past behavior, which should give some indication of whether they’ll actually vote.
But Mellman looks for the likely electorate. The distinction is important. As Mellman notes, there are “unlikely voters” who actually wind up voting. And “likely voters” who wind up not voting. Every election there is some percentage of both, and Mellman has clearly mastered the art and science of modeling the likely electorate. It seems that in the Reid race, unlikely Reid voters — Hispanics come to mind — actually voted, with the help of the Reid turnout operation and Angle’s immigration ads that were deeply offensive to these voters.
• The cell phone problem. By now, this one is fairly well known, but as Mellman said, “It is a real problem.” To begin with, federal law prohibits automated calls to cell phones. So any poll conducted that way can’t call any cell phones. “There’s a real difference between people we reach on land lines and people on cell phones. If you’re only calling land lines, you get a distorted picture.”
How distorted?
A Pew Research Center analysis showed that a quarter of all Americans can be reached only by cell phone. They tend to be younger, a demographic dominated by Democrats. Pew estimated the land-line bias gives Republicans 4 to 6 percentage points in polls.
• Hard-to-reach voters. People don’t pick up their phones. A truly random sample requires the pollster to be persistent and try and try again with the same voter. Otherwise, you don’t get a truly random sample; you get a random sample of easy-to-reach voters.
Again, this has a distorting effect. Mellman’s group will try people six or seven times. Many pollsters are not as persistent because it’s cheaper to just move along.
“In Nevada these factors all mattered and all mattered meaningfully,” Mellman said.
Mellman didn’t address Hispanic voters, but polling experts including Nate Silver have speculated they may have been undercounted in polls.
(Sun columnist Jon Ralston was the earliest and most vocal critic of public polling in the race.)
The Reid camp said all along that it was confident because of its internal polls. Reporters were rightly skeptical, especially given that the campaign wasn’t sharing the data.
The key, though, is that the Reid campaign wasn’t using its polls as part of a press strategy, trying to goose up supporters. They wanted good information from which to craft a strategy.
“There’s no sense paying for bad information,” Mellman said. “Our job starts at getting it right. Then we use and interpret the data to build a strategy. But getting it right is the foundation.”
Mellman addressed the potentially damaging effect of bad public polling. “The problem is that these things can have an impact.” A bad poll can hurt a campaign, creating a narrative of defeat in the media, deflating donors and volunteers.
“So the media has a special responsibility to get it right. If you’re not going to get it right, then don’t bother.”
A novel concept in some quarters.
Obviously the pollster was aware that busloads of union voters would be hauled to the polls by the Reid campaign. This made the difference.
It certainly wasn't a landslide, was it??? If people had bothered to talk to Angle and heard what she really said, it might have gone the other way. I give Reid the nod that he used sound bites to erode her support. Maybe next time. And while I'm at it, the only reason Raggio supported him is because they are partners in a business deal. I hope he gets dumped!
Just two questions:
1) In the last election cycle, ALL the polls were way off in Nevada, also. But there were mainly accurate in almost every other race in the country. Why does it seem that Nevada is the one that is only constantly off?
2) Why did some 50,000 people in Clark County hold their nose and vote for Reid Sr and not Reid Jr? They hated the son more than the father????
Some stuff makes no sense whatsoever.
Hats off to Mr. Mellman for diligence in getting a representative sample. I teach research methods and public opinion polling and am constantly reminding my students of the importance of "call backs" to numbers in the sample where no one picks up. Much of the polling today, especially the robocalls, call until they get their sample size, which gives them a distorted sample. This story is one I'll use in my classes as it is such a great illustration.
Who Cares???
To BC_Redhead, who says "If people had bothered to talk to Angle and heard what she really said": what planet have you been living on during this election cycle? The best way to reach lots of people is through the press, yet Sharron avoided the press like the plague, except those who would allow her to fundraise directly on their programs. Furthermore, we had plenty of video clips showing exactly what she did say, and those are what helped to sink her.
To LarryVegas: Sour grapes, anyone?
> If people had bothered to talk to Angle and heard what she really said,If people had bothered to talk to Angle and heard what she really said,<
I heard angle tell a group of Hispanic kids that some of them looked Asian to her. I also saw her attack Hispanics as thugs. makes you wonder why she lost, eh?
off on another bent --- how in the world does the RJ continue to exist when they attack their customers? take a read of Sherm's and Mitchell's columns today and it's everyone in the world but them that screwed the pooch last Tuesday.
The sun is a customer of the RJ, under constant attack.
The casinos are customers of the RJ, under attack for taking employees to the polls. would you spend ad money with the RJ if you were them? I sure wouldn't.
Hispanics are customers of the RJ, under attack because they're portrayed as the thugs angle sold them as.
one will never improve without self reflection and honest assessment. so the RJ is doomed to continue its downward spiral into the ground. not saying that's bad --- but I do hope the empty-headed leadership over on Bonanza doesn't wonder why they're dead meat in the long run.
Note to Sherm --- come get that free paper you dropped off today before I call the cops for your littering my driveway.
I, like Jon didn't believe the polls were correct and here is why. My friends and I decided to go out on our own, in different areas of town and engage people in conversation about the senate race. The average person, who didn't know what we were doing, overwelming dismissed Angles as a crazy whacko. My friends and I then agreed that there was something terribly wrong with the polling numbers.
You saw her attack Hispanics as thugs?? NOT TRUE!!!if you payed attention to the commercial and especially the one aired in Spanish on ch 15 you would have seen the lies, all of the ads that attacked Sharon angel where edited ..I can not believe people could not see Thur that...The casinos that did what they did in pushing their employees to the polls should be under fire.. IMO there are emails to prove what they did was wrong..look people IMO Harry Reid knew what he was going to do to win..he had his Buddy's from the casinos help him out case close..and to tell you I know for a fact there where people getting on those bus's to go vote ,who didn't want to go vote and didn't even know who they where voting for what dose that tell you???was the fix in or what??"YES"it was and I believe it was ..there was a man who called a local radio station here in town and told the station that his wife was one of the persons who was made to get on the bus and go vote and she was scared and didn't want to get on the bus and go!!!whats that?? being forced to do something you don't want to do LOL wow!!! sounds like our gov at work once again!!!!
this whole thing is a crazy..I can not see how anyone would have wanted this guy back in office,why?? all never forget when he said we only lost 36,000 jobs today and thats good...was he smoking something or what??just look at our city with unemployment and housing what has he done for us???
alex2 what is funny is that the exit polls is what i thought they where going off of ..what i mean is in the early voting they where asking people who came out of the voting places all over town who did you vote for and most said angle ..that is how they can up with the numbers ..and you know what i find more crazy is this was the only race that was wrong in the early exit polls numbers..
Harry Reid's re-election goes to show, that you can buy just about anything if you are willing to pay the price...
You let Sarah Palin do your thinking and now you're upset with Reid for beating her?! It's that "free will" thing that's gets them every time.
You still haven't figured out that the Tea Party will assure Obama a second term. Sorry about that.
Trust me. I'm omniscient.
No Vegastalks1, they were contacting people by phone, who were "the most likely" voters. Pollsters cannot afford to send people out for exit polls, that is done by each party. They use the robo calling system, which means the same "likely voters" are called over and over again. I worked for a company that used robo calling, no new numbers just the ones that were in their system. The other problem I had is that no poll polled more than 600-700 "likely voters" Those pollesters refused to say what section of the state they were calling or what party affiliation, what age group, etc. I'm not a pollester, but it's pretty sad when my friends and I did a better job on our "secret" survey.
Vegastalks1, any one can can a local radio station and say anything, just as we can do here. No one knows who we are so we can make up anything we want. It took me awhile to realize this. I will say this one more time. Since I stood in line for almost an hour to early vote, no one was forced to vote. Besides, who knows how one is going to vote anyway? Just as you said, people will say anything they think other people want to hear. Does it make it true? I don't think so.
Sherman Frederick III, his henchmen at the RJ and Mason-Dixon did everything in their power to sway the election using phony polling numbers and daily propaganda against the Majority Leader but came up far short again.
LOL Sherman Frederick III has no qualms about endorsing an Angle, Ensign or Gibbons yet finds a million reasons to hate Reid.
Sherman clearly has issues.
It is very easy to be correct when you know in advance how many rigged machines there are; plus how many dead people and people no longer living here are going to vote. It's not rocket science. It's knowing all the facts.
Tom...you're over-thinking the Angle agenda.
This woman was hired (whether she knows it or not) to be an election stooge.
Democracy has been trashed pretty much since its inception by British, ex-patriot con-men (also referred to lovingly, as the forefathers).
As long, as there is an elite class and tiers of wealth & poverty, there is no equality.
Democracy was a Monarch in disguise that inevitably turned into a Fascist Regime.
We, the People are ruled by behavioral control devices (laws and educational overlays) and gunmen (law enforcement officers)
Throughout history, these elites ALWAYS become delusional, wealth-paranoid and exert behavioral controls that exceed human tolerance.
Then there's a revolution (du-uh).
No one wants to think about this because revolutions are exhausting and a clear sign of failure...the failure of true social evolution.
But...we're due.
I can't make up this kind of nonsense:
"And the fact that the US Chamber of Commerce using illegal foreign money from America's enemies tried to buy the election for Sharon Mangle..."
Pollsters have not been able to poll voter turnout unless they have inside information such as Harry Reid's pollster had...
LarryVegas "Harry Reid's re-election goes to show, that you can buy just about anything if you are willing to pay the price..." you left out the money used to purchase the majority in the House of Representatives.
LarryVegas,"You can buy just about anything if
you are willing to pay the price".
WRONG.
In California, Meg Whitman spent 160 million
dollars and Democrat, Jerry Brown sent her
packing with almost no money spent.
Voters in California didn't want another greedy
republican stealing their jobs.
"...is hoping to show us that Sharon Mangle isn't the only crazy, lunatic republican running around Vegas."
WOW, crazy and lunatic at the same time...