Karl Rove: Can We Believe the Presidential Polls?
Last week's CBS/New York Times poll had Obama ahead by nine points in Florida. That's not very likely.
I've seen a movie like
this one before. I was in my 20s and director of the Texas Victory
Committee for Reagan-Bush. Our headquarters was in an old mortuary in
Austin. That seemed an appropriate venue when, on Oct. 8, 1980, the New
York Times released its poll on the presidential race in Texas, one of
10 battlegrounds. (Yes, the Lone Star State was then a battleground.)
According to the Times, the contest was
"a virtual dead heat," with President Jimmy Carter ahead despite
earlier surveys showing Ronald Reagan winning. A large Hispanic turnout
for Mr. Carter—and the fact that Texas was "far more Democratic than the
nation" (only 16% of Texans identified themselves as Republicans
then)—meant that Mr. Reagan "must do better among independents" to carry
the state. Our hurriedly called strategy session at the mortuary had
more than the normal complement of hand-wringers.
Then came more hard punches. On Oct.
13, Gallup put the race nationally at Carter 44%, Reagan 40%. The bottom
appeared to fall out two weeks later when a new national Gallup poll
had Carter 47%, Reagan 39%.
Associated Press
Reagan trailed in October but won in a walk.
That
produced more than a few empty chairs in phone banks across Texas. But
most volunteers, grim and stoic, hung on, determined to stay until the
bitter end. Only Election Day was not so bitter. Reagan carried all 10
of the Times' battleground states and defeated Mr. Carter by nearly 10
points.
Every election is different and this year won't replicate 1980. But context might be helpful to edgy supporters of Mitt Romney.
In the past 30 days, there were 91
national polls (including each Gallup and Rasmussen daily tracking
survey). Mr. Obama was at or above the magic number of 50% in just 20.
His average was 47.9%. Mr. Romney's was 45.5%.
There were 40 national polls over the
same period in 2004. President George W. Bush was 50% or higher in 18.
His average was 49%; Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry was at 43.8%. An Oct.
4, 2004, story in the New York Times declared the Bush/Kerry race "a
dead heat" and asked "whether Mr. Bush can regain the advantage."
Mr. Bush was hitting the vital 50% mark
in almost half the polls (unlike Mr. Obama) and had a lead over Mr.
Kerry twice as large as the one Mr. Obama now holds over Mr. Romney. So
why was the 2004 race "a dead heat" while many commentators today say
Mr. Obama is the clear favorite?
The reality is that 2012 is a horse
race and will remain so. An incumbent below 50% is in grave danger. On
Election Day he'll usually receive less than his final poll number.
That's because his detractors are more likely to turn out, and
undecideds are more resistant to voting for him.
About Karl Rove
Karl Rove served as Senior Advisor to President
George W. Bush from 2000–2007 and Deputy Chief of Staff from 2004–2007.
At the White House he oversaw the Offices of Strategic Initiatives,
Political Affairs, Public Liaison, and Intergovernmental Affairs and was
Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy, coordinating the White House
policy-making process.
Before Karl became known as "The Architect" of
President Bush's 2000 and 2004 campaigns, he was president of Karl Rove +
Company, an Austin-based public affairs firm that worked for Republican
candidates, nonpartisan causes, and nonprofit groups. His clients
included over 75 Republican U.S. Senate, Congressional and gubernatorial
candidates in 24 states, as well as the Moderate Party of Sweden.
Karl writes a weekly op-ed for the Wall Street
Journal, is a Fox News Contributor and is the author of the book
"Courage and Consequence" (Threshold Editions).
Email the author at
Karl@Rove.comor visit him on the web at
Rove.com. Or, you can send a Tweet to @karlrove.
Click here to order his new book,
Courage and Consequence.
Then there is
the tsunami of state-level polls. Last week, there were 46 polls in 22
states; the week before, 52 polls in 18 states; and the week before
that, 41 polls in 20 states. They're endowed by the media with a
scientific precision they simply don't have.
Take last week's CBS/New York Times
Florida survey, which had Mr. Obama leading Mr. Romney by nine points.
The poll sampled more Democrats than Republicans—nine percentage points
more. Yet the Democratic advantage in the 2008 presidential exit polls
was three percentage points. Does it seem probable that Florida
Democrats will turn out in higher numbers in 2012, especially when their
registration edge over Republicans dropped by 22% in the past four
years?
On Aug. 2, radio talk-show host Hugh
Hewitt asked Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac
University polling organization—which runs the CBS/NYT battleground
state polls, including last week's Florida poll—if he expected a
Democratic advantage in the Sunshine State three times what it was last
time. Mr. Brown responded that "I think it is probably unlikely," but
defended his polling organization's record.
Both candidates have advantages as the
race enters its final month. Mr. Obama is slightly ahead (but short of
50%). Late-deciding independents will probably break more for Mr.
Romney. Clear-eyed operatives in Boston and Chicago know this and are
only playing head games with their opposition when they assert
otherwise.
Team Obama's relentless efforts to
denigrate Mr. Romney as a sure loser appear to have convinced the
Republican candidate that he must run as the underdog. This will make
the naturally cautious Mr. Romney more aggressive, energized and
specific about his agenda in the campaign's closing weeks than he might
have been. It will also make his victory more likely. America likes
come-from-behind winners.
Mr. Rove, a former deputy chief of staff to
President George W. Bush, helped organize the political action committee
American Crossroads.
No comments:
Post a Comment