Analysis of 155 polls shows why Undecideds will break for Kerry

[TruthIsAll]

I have posted the projected Kerry % of the final vote based on the latest nationwide and state polls, which were adjusted assuming that 70% of the undecideds will break for Kerry. The rationale is that undecideds tend to vote against an incumbent, otherwise they would have already committed to vote for him/her, who they know very well.

National 13-poll analysis
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1963944

State poll, Electoral Vote Simulation
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1967897

On the other hand, undecideds are ready to committ to the comparatively unknown challenger, who they are just getting to know. They just want him to close the sale. If he does, he gets their vote.

John Kerry and John Edwards are closing the sale.

The Incumbent Rule
http://www.pollingreport.com/incumbent.htm

How will undecideds vote on election day? Traditionally, there have been two schools of thought about how undecideds in trial heat match-ups will divide up at the ballot box. One is that they will break equally; the other, that they will split in proportion to poll respondents who stated a candidate preference.

But our analysis of 155 polls reveals that, in races that include an incumbent, the traditional answers are wrong. Over 80% of the time, most or all of the undecideds voted for the challenger.

The 155 polls we collected and analyzed were the final polls conducted in each particular race; most were completed within two weeks of election day. They cover both general and primary elections, and Democratic and Republican incumbents. They are predominantly from statewide races, with a few U.S. House, mayoral and countywide contests thrown in. Most are from the 1986 and 1988 elections, although a few stretch back to the 1970s.

The polls we studied included our own surveys, polls provided to us directly by CBS, Gallup, Gordon S. Black Corp., Market Opinion Research, Tarrance Associates, and Mason-Dixon Opinion Research, as well as polls that appeared in The Polling Report.

In 127 cases out of 155, most or all of the undecideds went for the challenger:


DISPOSITION OF UNDECIDED VOTERS
.

Most to challenger 127
Split equally 9
Most to incumbent 19



more...

[spooky3]

1. Interesting!

[NMDemDist2]

2. kick n/t

[Nazgul35]

3. Since this is state data...

do those 9 and 19 come from particular states? If so which....you might have to adjust your other calculations (prob of Kerry win)...

Also....are those 127 spread out over time? In other words....are the bulk of the 28 other cases more recent (i.e. 26 of 28 are from after 1990)? If so, that's an important trend...

How much is the selection of the '86 and '88 elections driving this?

The fact that these are not Presidential elections might makes this nontransferable....what with different level of measurement....

[tritsofme]

4. Like I said in your other thread

they are talking about undecided voters in October. That is quite a difference from the undecided voters in July.

I don't think there will be very many undecided voters by the time the election rolls around, and all polling will be within the MoE and useless.

[Awsi Dooger]

5. Correct, and Kerry will not get 70% among a tiny number of undecideds

I have analyzed poll numbers extensively since '96. That "undecideds to the challenger" number is constantly overblown and leads to absurd conclusions, like Strickland a cinch over Allard, Colorado senate 2002. In the controversial Alabama gov race of 2002, incumbent Siegelman received a huge percentage of the late undecideds, all but wiping out a 4-8 point deficit in the late polls. Note the link to a 1989 article, when many of the current polling firms were not in operation and before the considerable changes in polling techniques, or even basic electronic factors like Caller ID.

Zogby and others push respondents much more nowadays, placing leans into the solid camp thus limiting undecideds. At the presidential level, we are such a polorized nation that winning 70% of any significant group is nearly impossible. It was much simpler to get a 8-4 split among 12% undecided than to swing 4-2 among the truly middleroad. According to a few articles I've seen, men are a growing percentage among the late undecided, limiting Kerry's shot at 70% or even close. Also, factors like debate performance or charisma are much more likely to sway that block than simply avalanching toward the challenger.

I love numbers but used to get burned when I applied them minus common sense. No Democrat has cracked 50% since LBJ. Kerry will not get anywhere close to 53% unless Bush's approval rating plummets into the low 40s, or less. If it's mid-to-high 40s, we are looking at a toss-up election determined by GOTV and Ralph Nader.

[TruthIsAll]

7. You are wrong about no Dem cracking 50% since LBJ.

"I love numbers but used to get burned when I applied them minus common sense. No Democrat has cracked 50% since LBJ. Kerry will not get anywhere close to 53% unless Bush's approval rating plummets into the low 40s, or less. If it's mid-to-high 40s, we are looking at a toss-up election determined by GOTV and Ralph Nader".

You say you have been studying elections since 1996. Lets see your numbers, your analysis. The media would like a toss-up. But they, and Bush, are swimming against the tide,

As for that 50%, if you just compare Dem vs. Repub, and disregard 3rd parties: Clinton did it twice, easy. Carter did it (51/49). So did Gore, who got much more than the official 540,000 vote spread over Bush.

In fact, over the last 3 elections, the Dems have gotten 139 million votes (52.6%), compared to the Repukes 125 million (47.4%).

Oh, and as for Nader. He's lucky if he gets 1% this time.

[dusty64]

6. Sounds good.

x