Path: bloom-picayune.mit.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!americast.com!americast.com!americast-post Newsgroups: americast.twt.news From: americast-post@AmeriCast.Com Organization: American Cybercasting Approved: americast-post@AmeriCast.com Subject: What good are the Political analysts differ Date: Wed, 28 Oct 92 15:01:10 EST Message-ID: \SE A;NATION \HD What good are the polls? Political analysts differ \BY Carleton R. Bryant \CR THE WASHINGTON TIMES With polls showing varying degrees of tightening in the presidential race, voters are right to wonder what's going on, pollsters and political analysts said yesterday. But the excitement over shifting polling results may be much ado about nothing, some said. "I can't imagine any valuable information relevant to the election that one could glean from the polls," said William C. Adams, a professor of public administration at George Washington University. Describing surveys as "snapshots" of public opinion, Mr. Adams said they "play on the excitement of political campaigns" while adding little to the process. But David Bomar Smith, a former political scientist at the University of South Carolina, said polls do augment the political process, albeit in ways contrary to democratic principles. "The media are biasing the outcome of the election with their polls. As a rule, most members of the media are liberal, and their polls reflect their bias," he said. Mr. Smith, a member of the South Carolina Board of Education, said polls poorly serve the public by providing voters no information on which to base a decision. Democratic pollster Ed Lazarus disagreed. "I think the public can be well served by polls . . . by fulfilling the founding fathers' desire to make elected officials responsive to public opinion," he said. In recent days, several surveys showed that support for Democratic nominee Bill Clinton declined, support for Texas billionaire Ross Perot rose and support for President Bush remained unchanged. But the polls' figures denoting the percentage of the electorate inclined to vote for a particular candidate vary widely. For instance, the Oct. 20-22 Time magazine-CNN survey shows Mr. Clinton leading Mr. Bush by 7 percentage points, while the Oct. 20-21 NBC-Wall Street Journal poll shows a 19-point Clinton lead. Polling experts said the differences reflect more the method of the poll takers than the madness of the questioned voters. "The first thing is, you can't compare the point spreads," said nonpartisan pollster Brad Coker, president of Mason-Dixon Political Media Research. "What's more important is . . . the range of support the polls indicate." Surveys in which the numbers of voters interviewed and the margin of error differ are bound to produce different numbers but may still accurately mirror the general mood of the electorate, Mr. Coker said. According to Mr. Lazarus, the order and wording of survey questions can also affect the outcome of a particular poll. Questions worded and arranged to elicit a series of consistent answers from a potential voter can skew polling results, he said. What's more, the practice of re-interviewing voters, called "panel back," sensitizes its participants to political news and distorts polling data, Mr. Lazarus said. "Those types of polls often show more movement on issues between surveys on the part of the respondents," he said. "The bad news for Republicans this year is that polls are generally accurate," Mr. Adams said. "That doesn't mean, though, there can't be a huge swing late in the campaign." Apparently, that's exactly what novelist Mark Helprin, a contributing editor to the Wall Street Journal, is counting on. In an op-ed piece titled "Why Bush Will Win" in the Journal yesterday, Mr. Helprin noted that no incumbent president this century has won less than 39.6 percent of the popular vote. "If the Perot vote exceeds 20 percent, which I believe it will, and the president holds or exceeds the incumbents' rock-bottom 40 percent, then Mr. Bush will win a plurality of the popular vote and may carry far more states than conventional wisdom foresees," he wrote. ****MAP TEXT DIVIDING THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE The results of The Washington Times poll conducted by Mason-Dixon Political/Media Research Inc. shows 302 Electoral College votes likely to go for Democratic presidential nominee Bill Clinton. Likely Clinton Total: 148 Leaning Clinton Total: 154 Competitive Total: 198 Leaning Bush Total: 33 Likely Bush Total: 5 270 Electoral votes needed to win This article is copyright 1992 The Washington Times. Redistribution to other sites is not permitted except by arrangement with American Cybercasting Corporation. For more information, send-email to usa@AmeriCast.COM