tv Pollsters Margie Omero and Kristen Soltis Discuss Campaign 2016 CSPAN November 1, 2016 6:30pm-7:31pm EDT
opposed a nominee in the last year. there's a reason why. the elections have consequences, there for their waiting until the election is over until there's an appointment. i'm sure sure there will be, the fact of the matter is that for us we believe a more conservative justice would be helpful, the president is not going to provide us with the conservative nominee. so we would advise him but not -- so if you want to come back with more conservative nominee we will consider it. >> is that your criteria for the supreme court nominee? >> are most conservative candidate i think i can get. [applause] >> i think it is dangerous to
set in stone our actions today based on how things went in the past. just because things were done a particular way in the past, and we say it's been done that way, even though it is not law, but we have to continue doing things and justify our behaviors based on the way things were done. i think that is dangerous. we have every opportunity this year to confirm the supreme court justice were not only moderate in the opinions but those that seem to gravitate a bit. but we have a republican-controlled congress that basically says because it
president obama has nominated the supreme court justice, the same way they have done consistently for the last eight years. i don't want to make this about president obama because he's not running for this office. but the reality is congress is a charged with the task of doing its job, not based on the way things have been but the way things are right now. so let's get the job done, that is what we need to do. [applause] and the nominee is someone that could be acceptable to both parties across the aisle if it was just a simple thing of saying let's get the job done. let's get it done. in this candidate, qualified candidate, a man whose morals are unethical, who is acceptable for both sides of the aisle, but the only reason i can see is it's only a personal opinion and
it has to be with that same abuse that we have seen consistently with over eight years. that whoever they bring up were going to say no and then wait to gain an advantage so that we get someone that will lean more toward the right and toward the left. when the people of america deserve somebody who understands both sides of the aisle and will vote in the best interest of americans. >> we will break away from the last few minutes of this and take you like to american university in washington. a conversation with the democratic pollster and a republican pollster on the presidential campaign and down ballot campaign. live coverage now on c-span2. >> including a joint class that went to new hampshire, 40 students for five days to carry cover the primary in february. a a form in april featuring diane feinstein, the author of when
women win. and a debate watch party a few weeks ago. i want to thank our cosponsors, kp you, i also want to acknowledge and recognize the person who truly is the inspiration for much of what we do and certainly this kind of event, dotty lynch. dottie wasn't expected to have residence in the school of communication in the inaugural cold director of our communication program. strongly administered masters program between the school of communication in the school of public affairs. dottie, you may have known her was a leading political analysts who headed the desk at cbs news and was the first women to serve as a pollster for presidential campaign, walter mondale. anyone who knew dottie knew she would be delighted to have two influential women here tonight
to talk to about the election. their rising stars in their field and when she was a pioneer. the plan plan for the evening is simple, we'll get started with questions posed by our moderators and we want this to be very interactive. we will have time for q&a with all of you. please be thinking of your questions and be ready to test these experts. i want to also now introduce my colleague and friend, -- [applause] >> good evening. welcome to to everybody who is here. i especially want to welcome guest speakers who are joining us on such an important topic is such an important time of the year.
has a dean of the school of public affairs it's a polite to cooperate with the school of communications on a political communications program. especially for something as exciting as this. a particularly for the school of public affairs betsy martin, and school of communication residence for their work in organizing the event night. as you know, american, american university is no stranger to politics. while many people are comfortable talking about politics, it's actually our comfort zone and what we like to talk about. many students students come because they like it too. so we love elections, but of course this particular election season has push the boundaries of politics in many ways. nonetheless, in a democracy, voting is one of the most
important actions citizens can take. given tonight's topic, a quick poll if you will indulge me. how many of you are about to vote in a presidential election for the first time? fabulous. i see plenty of first timers. i see a few more seasoned members in the audience as well. we will count that you have already done your duty in years past. the word democracy means power to the people. i hope those of you who are first-timers will exercise your power and vote next week. and many thanks to those of you who have already voted early or absentee. i am pleased to have the responsibility to introduce our speakers tonight. kristin anderson and margie o'mara are cohosts of the popular podcast call the
pollsters. as a team, they will share bipartisan thoughts on polling, our country's political system and voter behavior. both women are very accomplished. tonight i will only be able to touch on a few of their impressive achievements. ms. anderson is the author of the book, the selfie the selfie vote, where millennial's are leading america. she is the cofounder and a columnist to the washington examiner. she was recently a fellow at harvard institute of politics and served as vice president of the winston group. a republican polling firm in d.c. time magazine named anderson one of their 30 under 30 for changing the world. the executive vice president of affairs which is a democratic polling and strategy firm.
she has more than 20 years of experience with elections, politics, and policy. she founded momentum analysis which is a democratic polling firm serving nonprofits, advocacy groups and political candidates. political names o'mara one of the particles to to watch. so we have two people who have been on the radar for their remarkable contributions. both of our speakers are seasoned media commentators, regularly interviewed by major news outlets, including the washington post, the new york times. they are also frequent guests on msnbc, cnn, and npr, just to name a few. no doubt they are in high demand this week and i think you both for being here during a busy time. please welcome kristin and margie. [applause]
>> thank you all for being here. we are excited to have this dynamic duo of pollsters here. they are up early this morning on a morning show it here they are tonight. this is a treat and we appreciate them being here. i want to start by asking you, we've had two or maybe three october surprises but now or in november, how is it that what we have seen over the last week in terms of the polls, are they tightening at all or were they tightening before this latest incident with the fbi in the email? >> there's a different story depending if you're looking at national polls or polls in key swing states. national polls have seen a significant swing over the last two weeks. the nbc wall street journal poll shown a double digit margin nationally for hillary clinton. they bc washington post tracking poll, not too long ago showed a 12-point margin for hillary clinton over donald trump.
and today that abc poll may news because they announce they're currently showing trump up by one. that's a a huge decline over a short period of time. the question is how much of that is real. how much are people changing their minds and and really making serious decisions to change their voting behavior, whether that's third-party to a major party candidate, go go home, go to the polls, whatever and how much of it is actual change in the sample of who were talking to. how much of it is who decides to pick up at the phone on a given day. that's an interesting question we don't really have the answer to. at the state level you saw some shrinking of clinton's lead over the last week or so but not as dramatically as what you're seeing from that abc poll. so the question in the swing states things like the ads on television, have they made a more stable rate in terms of places where you may not have a
constant dilution of trump and clinton as on the airways but you're much more swayed by whatever's happened in in the new cycle at that moment. >> it also seems like there is tightening before the letter came out. the two polls that have really examined the post-cold me letter, this saturday, sunday and friday night. there is a morning political poll and then survey monkey poll and try to look at their reaction to the letter on friday and they came to the same conclusion that it's not making a difference. voters are viewing it through the lens of their own partisan leaning there is no convincing now. there is no october november surprise that could really move people, ultimately these surprises are reinforcing things we already know about the candidates. this new letter issue is really just a continuation of the email private server story we were talking about for a long time.
whatever happens with with trump is a continuation of crazy truck doing whatever his latest tweets or insult, it's just another continuation of what we are ready know about him. so people are not really saying okay that's the final straw and i'm changing to the other candidate. that's where you get the sense that things are -- and then the last thing to look at is what are we seeing in terms of early voting and votes that have been baked in? so if you you have some states where people -- >> what can you tell from early voting? >> it seems like the democratic advantage in a lot of states like florida, north carolina, where people are saying there is an advantage, but there's others too. on the other hand you see news today about how the math may be changing where you now
have democrats now putting money and states that were considered put away like colorado, wisconsin and michigan run the lists. those were states that were seen as states for hillary clinton. the fact that there's can be an ad by clinton and their allies in the states does that mean democrats are panicking and the races tightening? do they have the resources to spend and make sure they're saved everywhere and help down ballots for congress, senate some of the state's? we don't know. that's part of what the spin game is. that's another way to look at and be able to gauge what are the candidate seen internally because they are reacting to something internally just to see trump votes going to wisconsin and there's something internal there. >> there been so much focus on different groups on the selection, either turnout groups for either side, persuadable audiences, i'd love to know from each of you, what groups are you
looking at that are most interesting, so week from tonight if you're looking at the exit polls and really wanted to understand how the races coming together, what groups will you be looking at? >> every group is important, you can't get there without getting votes from every group. but two groups that are important are latinos and white, non- college-educated voters or at least looking at white voters by education. so every election cycle they become a larger share of the electorate, but a decreasing share of a republican. >> so george w. bush got 44 percent, romney got a little over a quarter, trump some polls are at 19 percent. if latinas increase. if latinas increase and he's at 19% is going to be very difficult for him to make up that ground anywhere else. the other pieces to look at what happens with white, educated or
without college. that's a real division and important demographic shift that we don't always see them focus on as much as we have. but what college-educated voters have never them voted democratic. so one washington post poll had a 30% increase. if she wins with white college-educated voters and trump gets 19% latinos will be very difficult for him to run the score with everybody not those groups. >> for me the group i would add to that would be millennial's. we are in my the wing the exit polls work they'll be a group of voters that they look at that are under age 30s. that's not the millennial generation, there's a good chunk of those that are the 30s, that's where i land. so up i'm watching the older
millennial's to see that these are the folks that came of age during hope and change, perhaps during the end of the bush administration. this is a group is a group that has been marketed as democratic. three publicans have almost lost the chance to win the group back. is this a group where republicans, at least down ballot have a shot? survey monkey put out of map last week about what the electoral college would look like if only millennial's water. only millennial's water. it was blue, except for kentucky, west virginia, idaho and wyoming were the only states where republicans won. it's not always like that. during the election in 2004 we have been the red state, george w. bush was winning regular voters. romney and obama came for a draw in places like indiana. even though we think of young voters says leaning to the left it's not always the case and as dramatic as what were seen now. many polls there doing polls with usa today, there tending to
find donald trump winning only one every five winners. so george w. bush and al gore almost tied with the youth vote in 2000. by the time he gets a 2014 george w. bush is losing, that 2004, in 2008 you get a huge margin. john mccain still is a third of the youth vote. it's a historic blowout. yet republican candidates still think it one out of three. donald trump would be lucky to get one out of five. so another piece to the equation, we know that young voters are breaking away from trumpet how much will they turn out? this is a huge are known. i get asked a lot, young voters are very disappointed, they like third-party candidates, not one more than the other but overall you have only 40% of young voters that have a positive view of clinton which is not a positive election for a lot of
young people. that raises the question that if younger voters are breaking for clinton she needs him to turn out in big numbers to offset whatever majority trump will have in the 65 and up cry. if younger voters do stay home that could be one thing that's a problem for the democrats. >> younger voters have always been lower turnout. it's always been a challenge. when i first moved to washington, 20 years ago we had a big project for the league of women voters and we had to study what was, what drove voting behavior and wasn't feeling alienated or politics were broken, it was was really age, more than any demographic, or attitude toward politics. and this is no long time ago. a lot of that is true now. it's not the the fault of younger voters are politicians necessarily, it is just part of
being in a place for a long enough time where you feel connected to the place where you live, your homeowner, mary, to make of your roots where you feel like you know where my polling places and who is running for office, i have now for a vote history were someone's knocked on my door a bunch of times. all of the pieces help drive voter turnout. a of the reason my millennial's now, at any age and era are voting less. >> what is the secret sauce to motivate younger voters? >> what does motivate them? >> i think it's the same thing that motivates voters across the board, what's in it for them. people are viewing politics and everything through their eyes and what it means for them. so talking about what it means for someone else's a little removed. i was talking to someone about climate change, while important to millennial's it's harder sometimes for voters to feel that immediacy and urgency right now.
so how do you make voters feel connected to the issues where they really feel it matters of stuff that doesn't matter? >> to large degree i think that's been an issue on the campaign doesn't seem like there's a lot of issue. >> i think a number we talked about on the podcast, i believe dallas was asking the questions going back over decades where they say our presidential candidates talking about issues that are important to you. even four years ago you had a majority, as much as three quarters of electric saying yes. you may not like those candidates but they're talking about issues that matter. historically that number has, as he approached election day. this year it's below happen going down. that's among all voters but you can see for young voters in particular if they feel unfavorably toward the candidates that this is been a problem. it is a self reinforcing vicious
cycle but on the one hand you have politicians who will come to folks like me and say that young voters don't vote so why should i do this outreach and the younger voters said the politicians are doing outreach to me. so i should be i reward them with my vote. and politicians politicians say younger voters don't vote. and on it goes. i encourage both parts to try to break that cycle. >> i wanted to ask what you have been referencing which is the million-dollar question at this point about turnout specifically i know turnout and trying to predict turnout and project which groups account for some of the variation in the poll, what you expect in terms of turnout question market will this be a high turnout election, low turnout? i think this the speculation has been all over.
>> it's hard to know. we had the former president of research on our show and he said this is a universe that doesn't exist yet. they are asking people to self-report the likelihood of voting. they they will overreport, maybe some of you over reported when he say maybe you have an intention so you just raised her hand and said i'm going to do it. so they want to overreport or they may something gets in the way and they don't get around to voting. it's hard to know exactly. you're relying on the best information you have or you ask other questions like you look at the file which has their history, sometimes composite stores that you can predict how likely someone is to vote. you can ask about their enthusiasm and whether they know their polling place. they have other -- you may send you in the wrong direction. a
lot of the polling suggests that people feel less inclined to vote than they have even if they're more engaged in the selection. when you see early voting advantages with some states with more early voting in past years maybe that means there will be higher turnout. >> what you think in terms of the turnout operation on both sides? does that matter in producing turnout? >> while wisdom shows that it will get your pointer to. you much rather have it then not if it's a tall race. on the republican side there's not really much of a grounds came to speak of. this is been a campaign were trump has performed a miracle with almost none of the conventional campaign apparatus that you would expect. i remember the romney campaign laughing it matters to have an office in your neighborhood where volunteers can go and take materials a knock on doors and say hello to their fronts.
donald trump got a lot of attention and earned media. he's good good at getting people to rally. the question is does that turn into votes? or does it turn into people buying hats with your slogan on it. i don't know that we know the answer to that question. when it came to the primaries trump would often say he's bringing new people into the process. that's what he'll do in the generals. many folks that he's bringing out into the primary are people who are already registered to vote and already people who tended to vote in generals. just not primaries as much. it's a question of how much lift can he get from this new, secret, activated trump boat out there. a lot of those sorts of are in the tank for republicans, already already factored into how he thought about the election. >> polls show that half of
republicans are evenly divided on whether they like trump or would prefer a different candidate. this was a poll from a week or two ago. i think without that ground game there's a chance that republicans will feel unenthusiastic about voting. on the democratic side we have the ground game and i know there's conventional wisdom or myth that democrats are not excited about clinton, she has consolidated over much of the sander voters behind her earlier than obama didn't 2008. while she had some challenges overall in terms of her favorability, she doesn't have the same challenges that trump has among republicans. >> the overall polling has taken up a lot of space in campaign discussions at rallies, trump is always citing this puller that poll, talk to us as professionals in the polling business, how do we as consumers of news decide what good poll is
to be trusted and a non-reliable poll? >> that's a good question. on the one hand you have folks that will say don't trust the polls, their are all rigged in sku. on the other hand with trump data points on their buy-in -- be a skeptic. that's okay you don't have to trust the polls 110%. no tuples are exactly right alike. our firms are involved in an interesting experience for they did a a survey of voters in florida. they call people off the voter file, registered voters, you know how often they voted in the past, and that did the interview this interviews and gave us the same data set. and they they said tell us what you think, how much is at an upper trumpet. every firm found a different
answer. i think your firm said clinton up by four, my firm found cleanup by one, some researchers found trump up by one. >> it's in the data set that came in plus seven. >> so this is something -- [inaudible] >> anytime you can adjust a survey it's unlikely that you are getting a perfectly representative sample. the good news is that we know a lot about who tends to turn out to vote and what we think the electorate is going to look like. whether it's major government surveys, examples from from past elections, what we know about boat history. you can take the factors and come up with your idea of what you think the electorate will look like. some pollsters choose choose to wait their data and balance it out.
if we have too many women and not enough men we way to the data so that every man's interview counts different in every women's interview counts different and in the end it will look like what the election really looks like. that is where it gets to be art as much a science. there are things like in the los angeles times is doing a poll with the university of southern california. they have a panel panel of people that they keep talking to. it's the same group of voters they keep going back to. it's unique unique and unusual for a survey of this nature. they find there is an analysis that there's one responded to the poll and african america living in illinois who really likes donald trump. every time he is in the panel donald trump goes up at least one point. that is because of the waiting period it's very hard to get young men, young african-american men, someone is
19 years old will be hard to reach. your voice is going to count for a lot in the poll to compensate for how hard it is to interview people like you. so because you have one respondent who really likes donald trump his motives counting as much as 30 times. that's a critique of that study and that's why you see that poll be in so pro trump. >> i bless them. they released all of the data. >> they were transparent about it. >> that analysis, analysis, you don't have, internal polls, private polls for candidates for nonprofits and organizations will release their numbers and they won't release the full data set. you don't need to really. that's a really high bar in terms of transparency. you just trusted their judgment. would you like apples it doesn't mean they're bad, it could mean that someone had a different assumption about whether party or the party
difference was three points or four points, that can make a really big difference, could be something in terms of methodology, whether's live calls are online. how much people being reached on her cell phone. what kind of panel folks are reaching online. how they are counting for likely voters doing differently. so all those different fluctuations really contribute to the fluctuation in the polls. it doesn't mean they're all bad. there is this tread. i don't know if it's getting worse or not. people doubt people doubt the polls that they disagree with. the washington post has done this showing that people disagree with any poll that they did not like the outcome. that they were suspicious of it. that was very much symbolic of what has been going on in the cycle. about 80% of the candidates don't even agree on the basic facts let alone of the policy approaches they have. the sense that everybody's living on their own.
>> the polling being part of that, i think it's a symptom rather than a cause and people want to create their own reality polls as opposed to be the cause of them. >> if you want to air on the side of caution, poll aggregators, don't ever let one pole throw you off or think oh my gosh, the poll showed that clinton was up by four but now trump is up by one, what's going on. stay calm. there's fluctuation is normal. it is typical, pollsters have different assumptions. poll aggregators are your best bet. with time to go through every single poll and understand what the specific methodological strength and weaknesses are. there is nothing such as a gold standard poll anymore. you can call people on phone but it's hard to reach. you can do online but you're missing some folks there. you can call voter fires but the near missing you registrants.
you can call randomly but are you cap capturing real voters. averaging and looking at these averages. >> at least you're smoothing out some of those. >> what about tracking polls? attracting poll is unique in the way that it works is you cut a rolling sample going on. so instead of calling a thousand people over two days, analyzing that survey and releasing it they are calling it maybe a couple hundred people a night and then the next night another couple hundred. they will rotated, were looking at the most recent three days. they'll drop out dropout a hundred people in at a hundred new people. that's why some the tracking polls are seeing donald trump picking up different points because people falling out of the sample.
>> i would love to know your takes and you have a podcast called the pollster. your your advocates for polling as a my, i would like to know your reaction and the role that polling has played this year in the republican debates last summer that candidates, placement on the stage was determined by the position in their poll and there is actually two debates and people call it the varsity and the jv and it was dependent on candidates position in the polls. i would have to know what you think of that. is that an opponent appropriate use of polling or not? >> there's an interesting interview we did, it said we are not going to release anymore republican ballot test before
the first debate because we do not want our poll to be abused in this way. >> people are doing crazy things and doing stunts. they're trying to get themselves two and 3% to get on stage. in this is wrong. we are looking at a poll of 800 registered voters your margin of error is going to be high enough that the difference between being been carson and rick santorum might be statistical noise early on. on the one hand what are the criteria can he use? how can you do this? if you have 17 people you have to have some method of deciding. on the other hand the frustration was the use of very small statistically insignificant differences between candidates to make significant decisions about their placement. once they had the first debate and have their addition, they had a chance to be in front of voters at that point i think it
was like you could do the polls normally. voters had a chance to see the folks. if you're in there at 2%, that's on you. that's your problems. but at at the beginning it was very volatile and all of these candidates run a very slim margin. wasn't appropriate to do that? i don't know. it's hard for me to think of what a fair alternative would be to make that really difficult distinction. >> we have come a long ways in industry from 20 years ago when i set a party and set i'm upholsterer and someone was really excited because she thought i was then upholsterer. said everybody wants to be a poll -- pollster. so there's data visualization and statistical modeling a big data. and people think that polling is
but it is also being able to have an ear to what voters are thinking. it's qualitative, it's focus group and writing messages that make sense. as been able to tell a story of what the data says. spain able to write questions that translate what your client wants to know and what they think a respondent cares about it wants to understand. i be able to translate. all of those things are totally different than statistical modeling, big data and multi- analysis. you need to be able to be fluent in all of it. i think that something that is shortchanged in some of the dialogue. people think is is a 42..3 or 42.2. maybe it's raked. that stuff is a very small part of what goes on behind the
scenes. >> we want to get to some questions. we have a few quick questions before we go to the audience. favorite poll question? >> what really tells you something about a voter. >> this is a good one. >> i'm trying to think. you can pick favorite or worse. >> i don't want to call it like the worst, i have a beef with it and it's longitudinal so i can appreciate that they don't want to change it, it's a stronger gun laws. so how we talk about gun laws has changed a lot over decades and how we view gun laws. it used to be as gun control. that's the phrase we use. but when you use the word control the changes the responses of having people support stronger
gun laws. there's a significant a significant difference. studies have shown that. but places like -- they been asking about gun control for 20 years. they're not going to throw their question out and lose that tracking which is valuable. so pugh has an example of a question which is what you think is more important, controlling gun ownership or giving the right of people to own a gun. controlling gun ownership which doesn't talk about the means it's not the actual end of why we would do that, i think that really has a distorted view of how people view stronger gun laws. that's my piece that i've been on my setbacks. like 11 question soapbox for a long time. that's me as an example of how it really drives what people think about what public opinion is when lots of other show something different.
>> i can do my polling beef and this is informed by the news today. this this question that we ask people about something that happened in the news that it says does this make you more or less likely to vote for someone? these questions are silly because when he braked on the results, all of the people say it makes me less likely to vote for someone. were already in the other party and not voting for them anyway. and folks say this makes no difference. or they are ready supported that candidate. for the most part i think it can be interesting if you see a significant portion of people in someone's own party that says yes that makes me less likely to vote for them. you can see the changes in the ballot. and this goes to the earlier question of how is coverage of the race change because of the polls. i see mountains getting made out of mole hills were trump will say something and it'll say 70%
of voters are less likely to vote for trump because of this thing he said. and then polls will come out over the last week in the polls haven't moved. so i caution people and i think one of the most interesting ways you can really study the people's minds are changing our studies were over time you're monitoring the same people as if their minds change which is why like that u.s. l.a. times poll. there are problems with it but the idea about going back and talking to the same people is interesting. >> so individuals over time they were trump voters and then suddenly there were clinton voters. that's interesting. sometimes we love to read into most waters probably haven't read like the wiki leaks email and so they're just responded based on what you already think about these candidates. i think it's the over
interpretation of some of the stuff. that has been my beef. >> that is the answer we all want to know. what what does this mean to your boat. people say nothing or i don't know, or whatever, whatever, let's go to the next question. >> there looking for people to talk about polls and much campaigns are desperate for change and something to talk about. i think people are looking for that to say here it is. and it's not always there. voters are not quite that sensitive that something breaks on friday and by friday night everybody's minds have changed. >> not everybody reads twitter. >> we will move to audience questions. just one quick question before we go to that. maybe you have some aspiring pollsters or at least folks and
students were very interested in political careers. can you give a quick tip or piece of advice in terms of your own career. what should they be thinking or remember is there thinking of their own future in politics. >> the best pollsters are those who do not think of it as entirely math or verbal. if you're thinking a polling you have to take these statistic classes and have to know how to use art, and yes you do. but it's also about can you craft a message that is compelling? he said in a focus group and talk to people for 90 minutes and really learn how to extract interesting insights into what the thinking and feeling. so psychology, rhetoric, these, these things matter to being a good pollster. especially if you will do this in washington, knowing a a thing or two about policy matters. what is in graduate school i tried to take a few classes as possible about pulling itself in statistics and try to take
classes about things like foreign-policy, the intelligence community, things outside of my scope. five a client wants to do a study about what americans think about u.s. foreign policy or what to americans think about education policy, if i have a little bit of knowledge about the actual discussions happening in those fields that will make me a better pollster. being well-rounded is important. don't don't think that you have to become a stat geek. you have to be a message gate, gate, you have to be a well grounded person. >> you have to be open-minded about voters. if you find yourself in a bubble or in a life where you're not meeting folks different walks of life, you not traveling the country are meeting diverse people and maybe find yourself having a narrower circle, that
will affect how open you are to hearing what other voters are thinking about what's on their mind. that's important. you don't get that from running stats all day. you have to talk to voters rightly surround yourself with different kinds of people so you can hear the different kinds of conversations. >> i think will go ahead and move to audience questions. we have two folks who will come around with microphones. please, when you stand stands if you could stand to ask your question, tell us your name and what school your farm. also we want to get as many questions as possible, please keep your questions a sink sink to make sure it's a question and we're not here to get campaign statements. but to ask experts their opinions and thoughts. >> i'm jacob with the school of
international service. thank you both for sharing your extremely valuable time with us. i appreciate it. we've heard a lot in the election about how much the national news media has been affecting partisan voter outlook. polls are important part of that. if you could give the news media one piece of advice that actually take, report on and represent polling, what would that be? >> it would go back to the thing i said about don't make a mountain out of a mole hill. as of the republican, we have to be part partisan at all, there's liberal media bias. i think the media bias is biased in favor of action, excitement, and the headlights to find the object it's not as partisan but it is still a problem. and then it is way too easy for the latest poll numbered about people go donald trump is to achieve the polls and he went up to. statistically that is a
nightmare, that's not correct. my advice to the media would be, and it's really not my self-interest to stay this because we get to go on tv all of the time trump goes up or down. what we be better served if for every story you did about what happened in the polls today, you did a story about what people are gonna be due to have affordable childcare. for every story about americans -- so i think that is the one piece of advice that i would give is to not necessarily make a mountain out of a mole hill. when you have junk food available it's easier to go get it. if i could say anything it would be everybody needs to calm down. every down. every time a new poll comes out doesn't mean the world is ending. >> there is a lot of data,
there's not a lot accountability of just making up a half a baked mix of data they think you've heard and repurpose a net as a poll or analysis that you did. you the people down broad paths. the sense that people and there's a lot of commentary where people are removed from where voters are, they are incredibly -- from all the weird twists and turns in washington and it will turn on a time based on what congress did or didn't do and endorse. so will this really matter in the midterms. things that don't matter, there's a chance that, i know there's an insider -type political media needs to cover, but let's not pretend that some actual voters care about.
>> my name is aaron, on the school public affair, i just want to say thank you and i also enjoy your podcast. in your episode last night you talked about the survey monkey poll. i'm interested if you could talk about if you think the online polling is going to grow the next few years, and if so what are the hurdles to get there? especially low income voters, who don't have regular access to the internet, how, how are they going to be included? >> it's already becoming more accessible by businesses. they've made the move a long time ago. it's the cost difference is really substantial and it's probably only going to get wider is landmine, and and cell phones become more expensive because the federal river regulations and decreasing number of cell phone only to do a really valid poll had cost the enormous
amount of money. if you have a lot of online polls call the election correct you'll have more news outlets and folks who are really value the legitimacy of a live coal poll that seems like the gold standard. of online polls the next cycle will be a different ball of wax. the challenge will be for congressional, county, and local races will be harder to do those polls online. there will be some hurdles but it is definitely moving. in the u.k. and canada there already doing online polls for elections. it's already accepted as common practice. >> the other thing to keep in mind to is that not all online polls of the same. you have the poll that anyone can click on at greenwich report
after debates, that will get reported on us an online poll and that is not nearly the same as what is going on with nbcc remote key partnership. i think -- what gfk does his contract people through more traditional methods. if you don't have internet they will get you a cheap laptop and internet connection to try to help with that coverage buys. there's no perfect field method. not everyone has a cell phone and not everyone has internet. there's no one perfect approach. it's important to point out that not all surveys conducted online are equal. >> hello. i'm michelle and i'm canadian. can you tell us about women,
where have they gone to in the course of the campaign? is clinton's gender a motivating factor for women or not? do you think that after this election women will be forever lost to the conservative cause? is there still room for conservative female perspective on sustainability of social programming or social inclusion issues? or has misogyny, the republican presidential candidate permanently turned away women from conservativism? >> this is part of my nightmares. as young, female conservatives this election has been a nightmare that is continuing to. i did a focus group in new hampshire about may be over a year ago. the primary sort. income a people were not focused yet on the general election. as
a focus group of women with the caveat that people are not always 100% honest with you are completely able to tease out the reasons why they feel a certain way. i did did ask him all things being equal, how many of you would say you give hillary clinton bonus points because you're a woman, she's a woman and you get to see the first female president? the older woman in the focus group were more willing to say you know what, yes. i like to see a female president in my lifetime. she's worked for. if i don't agree with her on the issues i don't agree but all other things being equal that's positive. for younger women they were less willing to go there. they said i believe i will see a few more president in my lifetime, doesn't have to be her. it has to be someone i agree with on the issues. in the exit polls of the democratic primaries bernie sanders were winning young women. there's there's no gender gap among the millennial generation. the younger people view issues of gender equity is a little
different. with that said, i don't think for the most part you're going to have to people in the millennial generation who say, yes, democrat forever because they put the first women in the white house. i think you have seen in the polls, at, at the same time trump is running up the numbers with white men without degrees, he is cratering among white women with college degrees. at just astonishing margins. that's the think that is going to be incredibly hard for republicans to come back from. i will hear people say donald trump is just a weird thing that's happening to the republican party. a lot of voters are willing to say, okay, that something was weird, proved to us that is not really you.
the party is going to have to quickly prove that is not us or risk permanent damage with groups like millennial's. >> this stuff is tough because for democrats who may be excited i don't care about gender i just vote for a person. there is social pressure to do it. that's what we aspire to be for ourselves. even ourselves. even people may be less inclined to vote for someone you're not always very good reporters of our by biases in any direction. you only have this and to do hillary clinton he can't separate out hillary clinton's gender how to get gender gap in the primary it could very well be that millennial's are so focused on income inequality and maybe that's number one issue and may be gender what about third or fourth. it doesn't
necessarily mean with some older sentiments argued like younger woman just and get it somehow. i don't think that was helpful either. >> the other things, traditionally, historically of the gender gap is ten points are higher than democrats when. a lot of polls show trump with more suffering from a larger gender gap. i think one had a 15-point gender gap. i saw ones with a 20-point gender gap. so this was before the tightening of the last -- but if the gender gap is between the 15 and 20-point range i think that it's going to be impossible for trump to overcome. he would have to get hundred% of those white, non-college-educated men and there's not enough of them to offset all of the other people he has alienated.
>> hello. i'm denise, from the from the strategic communication program, just want to know if you think the information they send out to sway the voters in the polling is overly saturated and that's why it's not really affecting them when they go out. like the one the notice that when on a friday to not really do anything, do you think people are immune to it or just don't care anymore? is it too much? if that makes sense. >> i guess it feels like a lot of fear in the zone. people feel overwhelmed with information, but it works, it does help move people and it moves a lot of the races and it helps down ballot, sometimes you need to communicate way more
than seems correct in order for people to hear. we did. we did an analysis in our office which you'll find tomorrow sometime where we ask about ten different types of contact. undecideds were less likely to -- while the basis like they had basis from the contact. that very much reflects what we thinks of the ground game. that stuff does matter in terms of making sure people know when and how to vote and get immobilized in that way so that does matter at the margins. i don't know if it turns people off anymore this year than previous years, i think people feel like they've had their fill when i can appreciate that. i don't think it suppresses. it certainly is not communication broadly, may be some of the negative tone in the communication might have an effect. >> there's some evidence that some stuff gets baked in early. this election aside and focus on 2012 there's a book called the
gamble by -- to political scientists who they did one of those longitudinal studies, they did a survey where every week they're tracking what people were thinking about the election. what they came to the conclusion of was republican spent hundreds of millions, democrats spent and they just cancel each other each each other out. it was just this mutually situation, they both just destroyed each other. there also reports that the obama campaign -- polling which is based on analytic type stuff. he didn't have the rear sample variation that they should showed was a three-point race for obama all along. a slight change after the first debate were bromley did well. but for the the most part it was stable. >> .. . .