Tom Allen's campaign communications director Carol Andrews reflected on a recent Rasmussen poll of the Maine senate race showing Collins lead reduced to 7 points by saying the numbers showed Mainers were "hungry for change". Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee spokesman Matthew Miller said that the polls reflected more Mainers "tuning into the race", and claimed the numbers were a result of Allen's attempts to tie Collins to Bush.
Now that Patrick Murphy, a well known Maine pollster has released a poll showing Allen trailing by a whopping 25%, what does this mean for the Allen camp's theories? Does the fact that Collins has apparently opened up her largest lead to date mean Mainers are no longer 'hungry for change'? Or does it, as Matthew Miller said, show that Mainers are tuning in to the race and judging Allen's message?
It should also be noted that Murphy's poll shows McCain down 46-32. While bad news for Republicans, it's even worse news for Allen. The math shows a significant number of Obama supporters splitting their ticket for Collins.
Here is all the advice you need on polls taken months before the election, where there is absolutely no evidence that they will be reflective of the voters in November: IGNORE THEM! Ignore them when they are good and ignore them when they are bad. The temptation to embrace the good numbers will make it impossible to repel the bad numbers that appear later. The Allen campaign is seeing that play out this week.
Collins has the support of 94% of her party’s voters compared to Allen’s 80% support among Democratic voters. >
To view a larger version of this cartoon, click here. >
I attended my first political "house party" in 1994 when I was a senior in college. It was hosted by one of former U.S. Sen. George ... >
Because of their roles as advisors, negotiators, and spokespersons, chiefs of staff and communications staff are some of the most visible employees ... >
It's Ridiculous
to suggest that all polls are wrong because some are. This is essentially the argument here, and it's a childish, stupid one. Polls that are conducted in a scientific, professional manner are very worthwhile.
There is plenty of evidence that polls are reflective of the final results. That's why they're used. It's moronic to suggest that all polls are worthless.
And thanks again for the link to the poll from fall of last year. That's very helpful, speaking of things to ignore.
Sorry for the outdated link.
Sorry for the outdated link. I will correct it.
I don't think all polls are wrong. I think that it is folly to attach meaning to polls this early--when campaigns have not even begun. How can you explain a 7 point difference and a 25 point difference in the span of a few days?
Your point is valid...
I agree, Wally, for the most part.
And I think both the Rasmussen poll and this latest one, because of their small sample size and rather broad focus, are pretty meaningless.
However, I don't think ALL polls this far out are meaningless. Good polling (ie not automated, good sample size, and most importantly with an accurate determination of who is likely to vote) is quite valuable.
A lot of people made fun of Pingree's big numbers in her earliest poll in the primary this year. But none of them were laughing on election day.
That's the difference between a real poll and a lame market survey...
Post new comment