Topic: Presidential Campaign 2008
Barrwatch -- Barr hits 6% in a national poll
... which is double where the same polling firm showed him just three weeks ago. Fluke, or surge?
by George Dance
(libertarian)
Wednesday, July 9, 2008

A new Zogby poll, released July 6, finds Libertarian presidential candidate Bob Barr polling at 6% nationally -- the exact margin of difference between Democratic candidate Barack Obama and Republican John McCain.

The Zogby Interactive online survey, conducted June 11-30, shows Obama leading with 44% and McCain at 38%. Independent candidate Ralph Nader scored "less than 2%."

Pollster John Zogby comments:
Bob Barr could really hurt McCain's chances. McCain can't afford the level of slippage to Barr we found among conservatives in this polling.... McCain will have to move to the center because right now Obama is clobbering him among independents. But there is the rub for McCain: Bob Barr has some juice among conservatives and is hurting him in several states. (1)
Barr attracts 7% from voters who self-identify as "conservative" or "very conservative." McCain polls 74% among conservatives, and 75% among Republicans (similar to his results in the later primaries).

There was jubilation in the Barr camp at the news. On the official campaign website, deputy campaign director Shane Cory wrote:
Before we've even raised our first million or obtained even a smidgen of media comparable to Obama or McCain, Bob Barr is already polling at six percent!

Let me give you the reaction of David Beiler, our political analyst who worked with Ross Perot during his 92 and 96 campaigns. When he saw the poll, David's immediate reaction was, "WOW! This is fantastic!"

David was there in 1992 when Ross Perot, then polling at seven percent nationally, was included in the debates with Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush. (2) [stress in original]
At BarrHQ.com (the new grassroots site started by Joey Bacon & Austin Wilkes in late June), reactions were similar. "These numbers are very encouraging," wrote Jason Pye. (3) "With the recent polling results from Zogby, as Bob Barr supporters we should be very proud in the work we have accomplished.," added Bradley Hankins. (4)

However, BarrHQ.com also provides some reason to question the results, in the form of a July 1 analysis by economist Bill Woolsey. Woolsey summarizes Barr's poll results since he became the nominee (including two previous Zogby polls):
  1. Zogby 5/21 -- 3%
  2. CNN 6/7 -- 2%
  3. Zogby 6/18 -- 3%
  4. Bloomberg/LATimes 6/25 -- 3%
  5. CNN/ORC 7/1 -- 3%
He concludes "that there is a 95% probability that Barr's support is between 1.89% and 4.11%. All the polls since Barr received the nomination are roughly consistent with this interval -- only a 5% probability that he is not somewhere between 2% and 4%." (5)

Yet this new result is completely inconsistent with that interval by a much greater amount than the margin of error (MoE), which Zogby gives as only 0.5%. So what's up? Is the new poll a fluke? Or is Barr beginning to surge, roughly doubling his support in just a week? Or what?

One difference between the new Zogby survey and earlier polls is that the new poll was conducted online, while the latter used conventional techniques. That word "online" may immediatey arouse suspicions in some. However, the Zogby organization defends their methodology by pointing to the large sample over 45,000 "likely voters" were polled (vs. roughly 1,000 in a conventional poll) and the resulting low MoE. The firm also points to the Interactive poll's historical success rate:
After nearly a decade in development, the Zogby Interactive survey on a state level was remarkably accurate in the 2006 midterm elections. In 18 U.S. Senate elections polled two years ago, the Zogby online survey correctly identified the winner of 17 of 18 races, and in the 18th race in Missouri, it was still within the margin of error, though it had Republican Jim Talent winning (he was defeated narrowly by Democrat Claire McCaskill). (1)
Woolsey does provide one bit of data that helps explain the discrepancy. He shows that a 6% result, though inconsistent with the post-nomination polls, is consistent with the numbers Barr was receiving before his nomination:
The poll commissioned by the exploratory committee in early April had a much better result. For that poll, the 95% confidence interval was between 5.42% and 8.58%. A month later, a Rasmussen poll showed similar levels of support, with the interval being betwen 4.35% and 7.65% on May 18th. While I find it difficult to believe that the publicity associated with the LP convention could have had such a negative result, the only other plausible explanation is that the first two polls were both 1 chance in 20 flukes. (5)
Indeed, much coverage of the LP convention was thoroughly negative. (For example, The New Republic's hitpiece, titled "Freedom Freaks" and subtitled "Scenes from the tragicomic demise of the Libertarian Party.") That could account for part of the difference. However, I would venture that there is more to it than negative spin by some press. .

During newspaper editor Neil Reynolds' 1982 byelection campaign for Parliament (still the most successful LP of Canada campaign to date), one pundit observed that Reynolds lost 1% of the vote every time he said the word "Libertarian". He speculated that Reynolds (who finished with 13%) could have won as an independent. That fits with other anecdotal evidence I've accumulated: it's been my experience that partisan voters angry with their party are less likely to back another party than an independent, equating the former more with disloyalty. So I suspect that Barr also lost some support among Republicans simply by being identified repeatedly as a Libertarian.

Woolsey finds a third possible explanation in yet another BarrHQ article. He notes that, in the April Zogby poll, Barr was backed by only 22% of self-identified libertarians. In the newest Zogby poll that number had increased to 43%, suggesting that many libertarians only learned about Barr's Libertarian affiliation in the interval. Woolsey goes further, explaining the 43% figure by stating that, even now, "many Libertarian and libertarians are just not aware that Bob Barr is the Libertarian nominee." (6)

While the number of voters who identify as libertarian is small, the doubling in their support could account for as much as one full percentage point of the three Barr picked up.

Those three factors -- negative publicity from the LP convention coverage, depression of Barr's support among Republicans from his being identified with the LP, and (conversely) depression among Libertarians from his not being identified with the LP -- seem sufficient to account for the disparity in poll results. Thus, there is reason to trust the new Zogby numbers; no need to dismiss this new result (as well as the two pre-nomination results) as a 1-in-20 fluke. 6% looks like a true estimate of the campaign's present strength.

While that result is satisfying, much higher than any Libertarian presidential campaign has ever received, it is no reason for the campaign to rest on its laurels. It is only a first step. Fortunately, the campaign recognizes that fact, with Cory arguing forcefully for taking the next step:
Four percentage points are all that we need to get into the Google/YouTube presidential debate that is scheduled for September 18th.

According to the debate rules we need to break ten percent in at least three polls before the debate starts in New Orleans.

This is an achievable goal if we all work together to make it happen.

Please do all that you can to spread the word about our campaign. Hit the Internet and hit the streets and let your friends and family know that there is a better choice for America: His name is Bob Barr. (2)

----------

Sources

(1) "Zogby Poll: Building Mo-bama! Democrat Leads McCain in Electoral College Tally, 273-160," Zogby International, July 6, 2008. http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1523

(2) Shane Cory, "New Polling Numbers for Bob Barr!", Bob Barr 2008 Blog, July 7, 2008. http://campaign.blog.bobbarr2008.com/2008/07/07/new-polling-numbers-for-bob-barr/

(3) Jason Pye, "Zogby: Barr at 6% nationwide," BarrHQ.com, July 6, 2008. http://www.barrhq.com/bob-barr/zogby-barr-at-6-nationwide/

(4) Bradley Hankins, "More Ways To Help Bob Barr," BarrHQ.com, July 7, 2008. http://www.barrhq.com/bob-barr/more-ways-to-help-bob-barr/

(5) Bill Woolsey, "National Polling–3% Again," BarrHQ.com, July 1, 2008. http://www.barrhq.com/general/national-polling-3-again/

(6) Bill Woolsey, "Zogby Polling and Libertarians," BarrHQ.com, July 7, 2008. http://www.barrhq.com/general/zogby-polling-and-libertarians/

-

©2008 George Dance, all rights reserved. You must have written permission from the author in order to republish this work.
Published: Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Last modified: Monday, July 14, 2008

The views expressed in this article are those of George Dance only and do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. George Dance is solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.

Report violation by George Dance of Nolan Chart LLC's terms of use policy.

More Articles By George Dance

Reader Comments:

Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2008-07-09 14:42:02

The question you're overlooking is, "surge...based on what?" There's really no reason to believe that any significant number of Americans know who Barr is. So other than stastical game-playing, what actual events have taken place which would improve Barr's positive name-recognition among likely voters. Answer that question, and you'll know the answer to the question you posed.

Report violation

Posted By: George Dance
Date: 2008-07-09 17:48:08

Here's two interesting graphs which allow one to see what's going on. (Sorry, I don't know how to live-link comments.)


http://tinyurl.com/6aw5sh compares media and google searches for the 2008 and 2004 campaigns. It shows that news coverage of Barr both went up and stayed up through June - and so have searches. I'd hypothesize that the news coverage (mainly Barr's TV appearances) is the "event" in question.

http://tinyurl.com/6aw5sh compares campaign website traffic. It shows that the Barr site has been getting roughly double Nader's traffic through June. While this may be less reliable, as it counts repeats, it does confirm that the interest has been in Barr this month.

 

 

Report violation

Posted By: George Dance
Date: 2008-07-09 18:23:03

Sorry, the Barr/Nader site link was incorrect. Here's the real one:

http://tinyurl.com/5mbmpd

Report violation

Posted By: Commandroid
Date: 2008-07-09 20:09:52

George, I love your article, and I concur with your analysis and excitement. I firmly believe that Bob Barr received some valuable media exposure in June that has contributed to his bump in the polls. If we can get him into the debates with those two losers from the other party, the LP has an excellent opportunity to show America a viable alternative to the Republicrats. These are exciting days!

Report violation

Posted By: censoredagain
Date: 2008-07-10 10:29:43

Now if we can only anser the question why are people scared of liberty?

Report violation

Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2008-07-11 04:58:27

I have a question. According to that 6% poll, Barr gets the support of 43% of self-identifying libertarians.

43%? How can this be? Take a look at this poll by contrast. While it doesn't include Barr, it does show how well Obama and McCain do among liberal and conservative voters.

Obama gets the support of 79% of self-identified liberal voters, while 58% of self-described conservatives support McCain. The article made the point that McCain suffers from what it calls a "passion gap" compared to Obama.

Well, if McCain suffers from a "passion gap" at 58% of his most likely supporters, what does it say about Barr when he can only muster the support of 43% of self-identifying libertarians???

I'll tell you what it says. It says that even though Barr is the Libertarian Party's nominee for President, he doesn't have the support of even a majority of the people who supposedly should support him.

That shouldn't happen, so why is it happening? I think it's happening because a majority of libertarians don't trust Barr. And why might that be? I think it's because Barr hasn't totally come clean about his claimed "conversion" to libertarian ideals. Unlike most people who convert to libertarian beliefs, Barr has no story to tell about his own conversion.

Let me emphasize...I have no problem with the idea of someone changing their minds about libertarian beliefs and becoming more libertarian. As others have pointed out, this is necessary for changing America. What I and others have a problem with Barr about is that we're not convinced his conversion is genuine. We want to hear more about it, but the candidate remains mute on the subject.

You've got to get the choir singing for you if you want the congregation to sing out loud. Barr's campaign assumes that libertarians support him. He hasn't bothered to check if the choir is really singing. He's really not doing what he needs to do to win them over. This strikes me as being a classic political mistake. You've got to win over those who are your potential best friends before you can go after the rest of the population. Barr isn't doing that.

Report violation

Posted By: George Dance
Date: 2008-07-14 02:08:27

But, Walt: if (as Woolsey says) these self-identified libertarians make up 2% of the voters, that's 4 million voters; and even if only half of them vote, that means that the LP candidate has never attracted majority support from them. This 43% figure is being used to suggest that Barr is losing the LP's historical support base, as if virtually 100% of this group has voted LP in the past, * but it's not at all clear that that's the case. Without some historical comparisons, I can't say whether Barr is doing better, worse, or the same as past LP candidates -- my guess (based on the 2 million voter assumption) is that he's doing better, but that's only a guess.

 * A particularly vile example of that is on the BTP website, where the spin on these results is "57% of libertarians don't think Barr is a Libertarian," and that he has a "57% disapproval rating." I would love to see how many votes Charles Jay got among this group, and his consequent "disapproval rating." Alas, BTP is more interested in reporting on Barr than on Jay.
 

 

Report violation

Posted By: James R.
Date: 2008-07-18 19:31:48

Saying Barr and Nader are taking votes away from McCain and Obama is like saying Els and Singh are taking birdies away from Woods and Mickelson.

Report violation