February 2, 2020

"One operator had apparently enlarged the font size on their computer screen, perhaps cutting off Mr. Buttigieg’s name from the list of options..."

The NYT has unnamed sources who explain what went wrong with that Des Moines Register poll that was withheld at the last minute.

The Register itself only said: "a respondent raised an issue with the way the survey was administered, which could have compromised the results of the poll. It appears a candidate’s name was omitted in at least one interview in which the respondent was asked to name their preferred candidate."

In the NYT we learn that one person who was surveyed was given a list of names that did not include Buttigieg, and this person contacted the Buttigieg campaign, which took the issue to the Des Moines Register. That is, if it were not for that one person noticing and caring enough to contact the campaign, the poll would have gone out.

In case you're wondering how reliable polls are! One operator enlarges the font, and the randomized list of names on the screen is missing a name. The operator could have scrolled down, I presume, but this is someone given the freedom to enlarge the font but not with it enough to remember that the visible screen is not the whole page.

79 comments:

Eric said...

Nothing to see here. The next poll will be that day's top headline.

rehajm said...

Perhaps an honest mistake as they say. The bigger issue are the legitimate gripes about subjective sample sizing, bias, unethical representation and outright manipulation. Is 37 percent ‘independents’ really an appropriate representation of the voters? Is 71.4 percent an ethical representation when polls of plus minus 5 percent and other data are stewed together?

Amadeus 48 said...

I don’t see Buttafuoco as being anything other than a spoiler. He’ll wind up with support of 8% of Democrats and (53% of Republicans) for the Dem nomination.

stevew said...

More rigging. I'm tired of all the rigging.

Was with a bunch of thirty somethings yesterday, all Democrats that hover around the moderate spot on the leftist continuum. Lots of disappointment at the current field of candidates.

Most disliked:
- Biden
- Bloomberg
- Steyer

Not a lot of enthusiasm for Bernie and Warren. Buttigieg is too inexperienced and is/was a major. Not ready. They were hard pressed to list the others in the race.

They are a bit envious of the relative quality of the GOP candidate - even though they don't like Trump.

Shouting Thomas said...

Politics is such a tiny, mostly irrelevant part of my life.

And, yet, to people who encounter me here politics must appear to be the sum total of my life.

The loneliness that drives us to the internet seems to lead us inevitably to this dead end of endless politics.

I'm off to church. Enjoy the Sabbath!

rehajm said...

according to two people familiar with the incident who did not have permission to speak about it publicly.

JFC- is the media now obligated to use unnamed sources for all information or is it force of habit?

gilbar said...


In case you're wondering how RIGGEDpolls are
fify

Browndog said...

I don't believe them.

One operator. Order of candidates listed constantly changes as to not list the same person first. They could easily disregard the few people that didn't hear Buttjudge's name.

They spiked it because it's a Bernie runaway, and everyone knows it.

David Begley said...

Why no rigged tag?

Browndog said...

We're supposed to believe this happened:

Pollster: What candidate do your support?

Person: Pete.

Pollster: Sorry, he's not on the list.

Person: OK. Warren then.

rhhardin said...

Polls are no good even if they're done right. Opinion isn't a vote. A vote has a moment of madness when you take responsibility for whatever it is you've done. Opinion happens in a different ritual entirely, one side pretending to be neutral and the other pretending to care.

rhhardin said...

You don't see recounts or overlooked results coming in from outlying pollsters in close polls.

rhhardin said...

If you're called (but who answers the phone these days) don't answer questions but keep the pollster on the line with meta-questions. At some point comment, "You're not allowed to hang up, are you." So that the pollster knows the game that's on. Then see how long you can keep them following that rule.

It ruins the poll if they hang up.

iowan2 said...

Bernie is gaining, all others are trending down. Of course the poll is flawed. Why do people overthink everything. (I blame 24 hour news channels that don't report news, but go one forever about "what if".

Ann Althouse said...

"We're supposed to believe this happened..."

No, a list of names is read before the person is asked to pick, and a name the person wanted to pick was not on the list. Others who are surveyed may have simply picked from the list given. The list was randomized with each call, so different names would be missing from the list on different calls. That was enough to make the whole damned enterprise not worth putting out.

Ann Althouse said...

"Why no rigged tag?"

My tag is "rig fatigue" and it's about criticizing calling everything rigging. That isn't the case here.

BarrySanders20 said...

Headline should be: Pollaxed

gilbar said...

So, just to be clear ,
They're NOT polling (asking) people who they support;
They're Saying, from THESE PEOPLE LISTED,
Which do you support?

IF was a Real poll, wouldn't they Ask
"WHO DO YOU WANT?"
And write That down?

tim maguire said...

Can’t they just exclude that surveyor’s results?
If this person was so incensed, why didn’t they say something at the time?
How many people experienced this?
How many people who might have chosen Buttigieg didn't for this reason?

Throwing out the survey seems like a drastic response.

rhhardin said...

1
Among twenty snowy mountains
the only moving thing
was the pieman coming.

2
I was of three minds,
like Simple Simon
looking at three pies.

gilbar said...

So, IF the Majority of Iowans Really Want
Vampire Weekend
They can't indicate that on the poll?

tim maguire said...

rehajm said...Perhaps an honest mistake as they say. The bigger issue are the legitimate gripes about subjective sample sizing, bias, unethical representation and outright manipulation.

In the realclearpolitics impeachment polls, I mostly just look at the i dependents’ responses to gauge true public opinion. Two things cone through—independents are not persuaded by the Democrats’ case and Democrats are wildly over-sampled in the polls. (Weirdly, Fox News is the outlier—they show overwhelming support for impeachment among independents, way out of line with every other poll.)

AllenS said...

I shall make a prediction --

Bloomberg will be the nominee of the Democrat Party.

No way in Hell will the people who run the Democrat Party, let Sanders win the nomination. Also, Slow Joe Biden is an embarrassment, and he'll have to go, and go he will, and without so much as a whimper.

There you have it.

rhhardin said...

Oversampling democrats isn't an error necessarily. It's called stratification. It's used to reduce statistical error. You do have to process the data right, though.

Example: if republicans all vote 100% the same way, you only have to sample one republican. You'd be wasting your resources to sample more. Put them on the democrats, who have some variability, and use the extra sampling to reduce that error.

In processing you put back how many people the single republican represents before adding it in.

David Begley said...

Law prof answer! Do I lose points on the final?

Temujin said...

The Polls! The Polls!

Remember how wrong they've been for every election dating back to Reagan/Mondale. Yeah...they had Reagan winning, but not by every state (except Minnnnnnnesooooota). And Bush/Kerry. And Bush/Gore. And of course, 2016, which should have been enough to close up that hideous industry.

Election polls are like NCAA polls. No more definitive.

Forget the Polls. Forget Chuck Todd. Open your eyes. You'll be more accurate.

Fernandinande said...

An enlarged font the size of a shrunken font.

rehajm said...

It's called stratification.

Open primary states skew the data. In those places independents are not a homogenous subgroup- it is composed of an unspecified mix Democrats, Republicans and independents.

MayBee said...

tim maguire said...
Can’t they just exclude that surveyor’s results?
If this person was so incensed, why didn’t they say something at the time?
How many people experienced this?
How many people who might have chosen Buttigieg didn't for this reason?


They have no way of knowing any of those things. And that's why they threw it out.

They don't even know if this is the only surveyor who did it.

rehajm said...

Some more sophisticated (expensive) polls try to account by asking not only about registered voter affiliation but identified political 'leanings' or voter tendencies, but it's home brewed science-y at best...

tim maguire said...

rhhardin said...
Oversampling democrats isn't an error necessarily. It's called stratification. It's used to reduce statistical error. You do have to process the data right, though.


Pretty much everybody knows that and it was my point—I was talking about the final adjusted numbers over-representing Democrats, not the raw data. Comparing the three numbers separately (Dems, Reps, and Inds) to the final score reveals the problem.

Sebastian said...

AllenS said: "Bloomberg will be the nominee of the Democrat Party."

In the beginning, I thought it would be Lizzie. I thought she could unite left and less left. I thought she could appeal to the women and the Althouses. But she has proved inept and turned off the Bernie bros.

Bloomberg opens up whole new vistas of rationalization for the Althouses. He's competent! Serious! Successful! He will get it done, whatever it is! So small and yet so rich! Althouse can even reprise her Hill vote: no chaos!

So the Dem establishment will be sorely tempted. But finagling the votes and the convention to suit Mini Mike will be harder than carrying water for Hill.

Eleanor said...

States with open primaries make polling irrelevant. I'm an unaffiliated voter, and I can ask for either ballot. In November, barring some unforeseen circumstance, I'll cast my vote for Trump. But in the primary I'll ask for a D ballot. Will I choose the candidate I think will be the easiest for Trump to beat or the one I'd be OK with should Trump lose? How would a poll pick that difference up?

MikeR said...

Meh. Software error. You sound surprised.

John henry said...



 Shouting Thomas said...

Enjoy the Sabbath!

You're about 12 hours late ST but your heart is in the right place.

Enjoy The Lord's Day (first day of the week, commemorating the Resurrection)

John Henry

JAORE said...

Paper polls. Paper ballots.

Ann Althouse said...

"Law prof answer! Do I lose points on the final?"

No. It's a blogger answer, so you lose even more points.

Some tags are very general, but more specific tags are useful and I care about the precision so it works to collect what matters to me and made me create the tag. So your question was like all the times people tell me I need to use what they call my "bullshit tag" just because I've written about something I should see is bullshit. But I don't have a "bullshit tag." I have a "civility bullshit" tag, and it's restricted to the subject of people calling for civility, which I regard as always bullshit. It would be more apt to have that tag read "civility" than to have it read "bullshit."

I'm Full of Soup said...

All good points Eleanor.

OT I think open primaries are unfair. If one wants to have a voice in a group's election, I believe one should be required to be a member of the group. I bet Soros was behind the movement for open primaries.

I'm Full of Soup said...

If this had been a Repub poll, the liberal hacks would be yelling who gives a shit about a little, mostly white, backward state like Iowa.

Unknown said...

Concerning the reliability of polls, President Hillary Clinton heartily agrees!

Howard said...

I wish you were right Allen S. You are correct that Bernie Sanders will be eliminated by the DNC MSM cabal that jury rigs the system. However the Deep state power elite don't want Bloomberg because he is just as much of a potential loose Cannon as Bernie Sanders. Biden is there man because of all the strings attached to each and every appendage and appurtenance on his body they can control at will. Dance, sodbuster, dance.

Char Char Binks, Esq. said...

If you can be eliminated by a typo, you were never really in the race.

Birkel said...

They're messing with Bernie.

Amadeus 48 said...

Could we please have some civility here? Why can’t we just talk like human beings—say, Johnny Depp and Amber Heard?

[sirens sound]

We have civility bullshit! We have civility bullshit!

Amadeus 48 said...

Somebody think of the children!

Birkel said...

Howard pretends the expression is jury rigged.
That's not so.
The expression is Gerry rigged.
Gerry means German.
Howard is racist against Germans.
Q.E.D.

(That's how #CancelCulture works, right?)

Johnathan Birks said...

I can see why this might matter if Iowa was holding a primary. But it's a caucus, where Bernie bros were already motivated to turn out. Should be entertaining.

Howard said...

Who's the racialist now? The idea of jerry-rigging being the proper form is ridiculous on its face. number one everyone knows that the Germans do everything correctly according to plan and specifications like a well-oiled machine and number two the Germans are not well known for sailing ships. Via wikipedia:

Two theories about the origin of this usage of "jury rig" are:

A corruption of jury mast—i.e. a mast for the day, a temporary mast, being a spare used when the mast has been carried away. (From French jour, "a day".[3])
From the Latin adjutare ("to aid") via Old French ajurie ("help or relief").[4]

Wince said...

Althouse said...
My tag is "rig fatigue" and it's about criticizing calling everything rigging.

Friggin' in the Riggin' by the Sex Pistols.

Birkel said...

Howard does not understand #CancelCilture.
#SAD

Howard said...

I'm pretty sure I haven't canceled the clit, birkel. Has your man in the boat sunk? Perhaps because you did not jury-rigged in time for the coming storm

John henry said...

Birkel,

The adjectival use of "jury", in the sense of makeshift or temporary, has been said to date from at least 1616 when according to the 1933 edition of the Oxford Dictionary of the English Language it appeared in John Smith's A Description of New England.[1] It appeared in Smith's more extensive The General History of Virginia, New-England, and the Summer Isles published in 1624.[2] The phrase "jury rigged" has been in use since at least 1788.

Wikepedia

Howard is a good fascist (A/K/A "progressive") The National Socialists were not fascist but were aligned with Mussolini's Fascist govt and shared many similarities.

As a good fascist, Howard would never be racialist against Germans.

John Henry

John henry said...

If the caucuses were down to Bernie and Biden and Bernie won, the media would report that Biden came in second and Bernie next to last.

John Henry

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

Gerry rigged

To unPC. We prefer ethnically engineered.

Yancey Ward said...

It will eventually (maybe already has) be leaked what the results of the axed poll were. If the poll showed Sanders with a big lead as some suspect, it will cause the Democrats problems regardless of what happens tomorrow night.

It won't affect what happens tomorrow night- everyone in IA has probably already made their decision on what to do- who support and whether to caucus at all. I don't think Sanders can win the nomination, but if he can win by 10%+ tomorrown night, he will have improved his position. I will note that Sanders is now leading the betting markets.

The absolute nightmare for the DNC is going to be a brokered convention where Sanders has the most delegates from the caucuses and primaries. If I were God, that would be the outcome I would give the DNC, just for the entertainment value.

AllenS said...

As far as a loose canon goes, Howard, Biden is a looser canon, that misfires, and can't hit the broad side of a barn.

J Severs said...

I hypothsize the operator had bigger screen and could read all names. The last name disappears on regular screens and viewer had to scroll down. Unintentional error, though error it is.

Yancey Ward said...

My hypothesis is this- the candidates were called hours before the poll was to be published so that the story would have commentary from the various campaigns on the results. Buttuvwxyz polled at half his previous numbers and knew his campaign was on its last legs if that is the result on Monday.

Francisco D said...

Yancey said: It won't affect what happens tomorrow night- everyone in IA has probably already made their decision on what to do- who support and whether to caucus at all.

I did not attend any caucuses when I lived in Iowa, but I did talk to several (Democrat) people who are often involved. It seems to be a dynamic process in which people are often successful in getting others to join their caucus. In other words, the decisions you make before going to caucus are often not the final decision you make.

Persuasion is a big factor in the Iowa caucuses. Bernie's people probably have the greatest ability to persuade other leftists (e.g., Warren supporters). Bloomberg's well oiled machine probably means that his people will persuade many "moderates" (e.g., Biden supporters) to join their caucus.

My Predictions:

1. Sanders
2. Bloomberg
3. Klobuchar
4. Buttigieg
5. Biden

Warren is toast.

Yancey Ward said...

Bloomberg isn't in the Iowa caucuses.

Francisco D said...

Bloomberg isn't in the Iowa caucuses.

I guess that would be a problem with my predictions. I think the reasoning is otherwise good. LOL.

Delete Bloomberg and move everyone else up a notch. Warren is still toast.

Amadeus 48 said...

Jerry rigged? Jury rigged? Whatever.

Big Mike said...

I bet Soros was behind the movement for open primaries.

No, they’ve been around a long time.

Rabel said...

In 2016 it was called the Des Moines Register/Bloomberg Politics poll.

It had Sanders at 42%. He got 49.6%.

It had Trump beating Cruz. Cruz won.

“Because of the stellar reputation of the poll, and the wish to always be thought of that way, the heart-wrenching decision was made not to release the poll,” she said in a statement on Saturday night. “The decision was made with the highest integrity in mind.”

Well, alrighty then.

stevew said...

I don't, as a rule, participate in primaries, waste of time. However, this cycle I may toddle on down to my MA polling place and put a mark next to Bernie's name in the Democrat primary. Just to eff with them a little. In my mind at least.

Lewis Wetzel said...


The results on Twitter via Powerline.

Howard said...

Allen S: I'll concede Biden is a loose cannon on a superficial level, but he's a team player who does what he is told.

Eleanor said...

If the names were in alphabetical order, it's Warren's name that would have fallen off the screen. What system would have put Buttigieg last?

Yancey Ward said...

Lewis Wetzel, if those are the real results, then it was spiked because of the Biden crater. Makes sense that he would crater- he was free to campaign in Iowa full time the last 2 weeks whereas Sanders, Warren, and Klobuchar did not.

rehajm said...

What do the Democrats and this year’s Super Bowl have in common?

No patriots...

rehajm said...

My mothers joke...

Francisco D said...

That's a good one rehajm.

Where does your screen name come from?

The Godfather said...

I've seen brief interviews of Biden on a couple of network news shows over the last couple of days. He doesn't expect to do well in Iowa. There's a 50-50 chance that anything Joe says is correct.

Martin said...

So, Sanders is surging in the week before the IA caucuses, and CNN, which helped Warren try to kneecap Sanders two weeks ago, finds a reason to not publish their final poll.

Uh huh, Sure I believe what CNN says to the NYT. I cannot imagine anything CNN could say or do that would make me believe them. They have proven themselves to be liars, over and over and over. Liars lie, that's fundamental. If tehy occasionally tell the truth it's only because it is in their interest to do so, but they get ZERO presumption of honesty.

Trust is a terrible thing to lose.

Student Accommodation Handler said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ken B said...

I think the poll showed Sanders way up. Insty has a link to a screenshot confirming.
Best line was from John Gabriel: TheDes Moines Register poll didn’t kill itself.

Ken B said...

Remember Ken's Iron Law of polling. All publicly available polls in America are juiced. Hiding the results is just an extreme form of juicing.

Ken B said...

Btw. I used to get called a lot for polls. I almost always just hung up. When I did answer I lied. I know of other peoplewho do the same.

Student Accommodation Handler said...

Great outstanding blog. thanks for sharing.
Luxury Student Accommodation