FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Are Polls Showing a Win for Accused Molester Roy Moore Accurate?

A steady drumbeat of poll numbers over the last ten days had shown a comfortable four to five point lead, on average, for accused child molester Roy Moore over Democrat Doug Jones in Tuesday’s special election to replace Jeff Sessions as U.S. Senator from Alabama.

Until yesterday.

Fox News’ polling is far less partisan than their news reporting, and it dropped a bombshell into the mix showing a double digit 50%-40% lead for Doug Jones. A Monmouth University poll followed which, while varying according to turnout modelling, is generally being pegged at a 46%-46% tie. Emerson University polling, often unreliable, has Moore leading by 9%.

Our method here at CounterPunch of averaging all polls in the last ten days without adjustments and including undecided voters has more accurately called two major elections (2016’s U.S. Presidential and 2017’s UK General) than other well-known poll aggregators. That method currently shows a 2.6% lead for Moore over Jones.

Those numbers may well be on target, even perhaps underestimating how committed GOP Alabamans are to the conviction that diddling kids is less bad than snuffing out their lives in the womb.

While the numbers in my polling methodology provide a strong guide, I have never felt slavishly tied to them, as when it was clear to me that Clinton was in more trouble in Michigan than polls allowed there ahead of November 2016.

In this case, I also think the polling average has it wrong. Some pollsters have done better than others at calling special elections since November 2016. Likely voter models, in my view, that assume Democrats are more motivated to vote than Republicans in Alabama today display the same kind of insight as pollsters who were more accurate in certain contests involving, for instance, Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump, Jeremy Corbyn (UK), and the recent Virginia election.

Taking, then, the average of better recent pollsters (without getting bogged down in the details of each decision to include or exclude by pollster and while rejecting Gravis’ late change in methodology) produces a 2% lead for Jones.

It’s always dangerous to pick and choose numbers, which is why I’ve included the unmolested numbers above. But the heart of the argument comes down to voter turnout modelling.

For a more in-depth argument on one of the particular issues, I’m weighing, see Nate Silver’s article of yesterday here on especially the differences between automated calling, traditional calling, and online polling. In essence, I’m going with a particular way of reading the Survey Monkey data because it fits at larger pattern of what I take to be the better way of handling likely voter modelling in situations where one side is more enthusiastic than the other (trust what voters are saying they will do, but do make reasonable adjustments for a variety of demographics in the population and with respect to recent previous elections).

In short, I’m going with a choice among numbers that matches what makes best sense of the narrative and a hard look at differences under the hood in dealing with data.

Doug Jones to win by 2%.

More articles by:
Weekend Edition
June 22, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Karl Grossman
Star Wars Redux: Trump’s Space Force
Andrew Levine
Strange Bedfellows
Jeffrey St. Clair
Intolerable Opinions in an Intolerant Time
Paul Street
None of Us are Free, One of Us is Chained
Edward Curtin
Slow Suicide and the Abandonment of the World
Celina Stien-della Croce
The ‘Soft Coup’ and the Attack on the Brazilian People 
James Bovard
Pro-War Media Deserve Slamming, Not Sainthood
Louisa Willcox
My Friend Margot Kidder: Sharing a Love of Dogs, the Wild, and Speaking Truth to Power
David Rosen
Trump’s War on Sex
Mir Alikhan
Trump, North Korea, and the Death of IR Theory
Christopher Jones
Neoliberalism, Pipelines, and Canadian Political Economy
Barbara Nimri Aziz
Why is Tariq Ramadan Imprisoned?
Robert Fantina
MAGA, Trump Style
Linn Washington Jr.
Justice System Abuses Mothers with No Apologies
Martha Rosenberg
Questions About a Popular Antibiotic Class
Ida Audeh
A Watershed Moment in Palestinian History: Interview with Jamal Juma’
Edward Hunt
The Afghan War is Killing More People Than Ever
Geoff Dutton
Electrocuting Oral Tradition
Don Fitz
When Cuban Polyclinics Were Born
Ramzy Baroud
End the Wars to Halt the Refugee Crisis
Ralph Nader
The Unsurpassed Power trip by an Insuperable Control Freak
Lara Merling
The Pain of Puerto Ricans is a Profit Source for Creditors
James Jordan
Struggle and Defiance at Colombia’s Feast of Pestilence
Tamara Pearson
Indifference to a Hellish World
Kathy Kelly
Hungering for Nuclear Disarmament
Jessicah Pierre
Celebrating the End of Slavery, With One Big Asterisk
Rohullah Naderi
The Ever-Shrinking Space for Hazara Ethnic Group
Binoy Kampmark
Leaving the UN Human Rights Council
Nomi Prins 
How Trump’s Trade Wars Could Lead to a Great Depression
Robert Fisk
Can Former Lebanese MP Mustafa Alloush Turn Even the Coldest of Middle Eastern Sceptics into an Optimist?
Franklin Lamb
Could “Tough Love” Salvage Lebanon?
George Ochenski
Why Wild Horse Island is Still Wild
Ann Garrison
Nikki Haley: Damn the UNHRC and the Rest of You Too
Jonah Raskin
What’s Hippie Food? A Culinary Quest for the Real Deal
Raouf Halaby
Give It Up, Ya Mahmoud
Brian Wakamo
We Subsidize the Wrong Kind of Agriculture
Patrick Higgins
Children in Cages Create Glimmers of the Moral Reserve
Patrick Bobilin
What Does Optimism Look Like Now?
Don Qaswa
A Reduction of Economic Warfare and Bombing Might Help 
Robin Carver
Why We Still Need Pride Parades
Jill Richardson
Immigrant Kids are Suffering From Trauma That Will Last for Years
Thomas Mountain
USA’s “Soft” Coup in Ethiopia?
Jim Hightower
Big Oil’s Man in Foreign Policy
Louis Proyect
Civilization and Its Absence
David Yearsley
Midsummer Music Even the Nazis Couldn’t Stamp Out
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail