A Message Before Election Day

Dear Friends,

The elections of 2008 have not yet been decided, because aside from those who have voted early, the votes have not yet been cast. Elections are not decided by polls or predictions, but only by the votes that are actually cast.

What we need to do

That is why the single crucial thing for each of us to do right now is simply to get as many like-minded people as possible into the voting booth as possible. Take the day off from work on Monday and on Election Day. Volunteer for the campaign of the candidate of your choice, and help get people to the voting booth.

Please see www.PoliticalResponsibility.com for more details and updates both before and after Election Day.

In particular, please sign up for the teleseminar I will conduct, along with a group of other national pro-life leaders, on Wednesday night November 5 from 9 to 10pm ET. We will talk about the election results and about the direction of the pro-life movement.

Perspective on the Polls

Finally, let me share with you some wisdom about opinion polls.

Throughout the entire Presidential election year of 2004, there were 239 national opinion polls about the race, and in the year 2000 there were less than half that number. This year, there have been close to 800 – and counting!

This explosion of polls has brought about more confusion than clarity. For example, nine or ten polls were taken one day recently and showed margins of 3 to 10 points difference between the candidates. The next day, the polls taken showed margins from 2 to 15 points, and on the third day, the range was from 3 to 7 points.

People wonder, “Who’s right? Why are the polls so different from each other, even on the same day?”

First of all, the numbers you hear represent all different kinds of polls. There are national polls and state polls. Then there are polls of polls (for example, some numbers represent the average of all the polls taken in, for instance, the last two weeks).

Now if the race is going to be determined by a handful of key states, changes in other states will be reflected in national polls but won’t matter for the actual outcome of the election. Moreover, if there is a change in voter attitudes taking place, it will take more time for such a change to show up on the state level than in the national polls – and there are fewer of the former than the latter. Finally, if a poll is a two-week average of polls, then changes taking place today will not be as obvious as they would be in a poll that tracks day to day changes.

The sheer multiplicity of polls this year, moreover, also means that there is quite a disparity of methodology and expertise. There’s a big difference between a polling company with decades of experience and a university group that decided to start polling this year. And if a pollster is polling in a particular state, the poll will be better depending on the expertise the pollster has about the electorate in that particular state.

Among polling companies, moreover, one must consider the quality of the sample size, the methodology used, the presumptions about the makeup of the electorate, the internal adjustments made in the numbers, and so forth. When you hear poll results, in other words, you have to ask, “Who exactly is being counted here, and what presumptions are being made?” Are the people who were polled registered to vote? Are they “likely” voters, and how has that been defined? From what party does the polling sample come?

Generally, a poll will take 40% of its sample from each major party and then 20% independents. But we have seen some polls representing one party with 50% of its sample, and the other party 30%. Those results will be skewed. It’s very helpful for a political interest group to create a poll like this for fundraising purposes, so they can send out a letter saying, “See, we’re up by ten points; send us more money so we can stay up!” Meanwhile, the donor hasn’t read any fine print about the poll’s methodology or sample group.

And presumptions about who will be “likely” voters can be tricky. Will the registration of many new young voters, for instance, translate into those young people actually showing up at the voting booth? That remains to be seen. A poll is an educated guess about how much of that will happen.

Polls often miss the dynamics involved in turnout, such as the motivation that various groups have, or the impact that the weather on Election Day will have. The good news for pro-life people is that the difference between a likely pro-life voter and other likely voters is that the pro-life voter is more likely to vote. Past election analysis shows that the pro-life movement’s voters are more motivated than those in the pro-abortion movement. We are better at getting our voters to vote. We care more about issues. We care more about showing up at the polls. This is not something a poll will measure in advance.
In the 27 states for example that have had marriage amendments, every single poll has understated the final turnout by as much as six to eight points. In states that looked like the marriage issue might be fairly close ended up not being close at all. Even in states like Oregon where it was expected to lose, it won fairly handily.
And, of course, a key number to pay attention to when you hear polls is the number of undecided voters. By definition, they can go either way, and haven’t gone there yet. Elections are decided by the undecided, who decide on Election Day itself.

We tend to “anoint” polls, but we shouldn’t. We tend to think that they are far more scientific than they actually are and we give them far more credence than they actually deserve. But they are filled with presumptions, projections, guesses, and margins of error, if not bad sampling, erroneous methodology, and outright bias.

Again, only one thing matters in elections, and that’s turnout. The elections of 2008 have not been decided, and they will be decided only when the voters come out and the votes are actually counted.

Congress and States

With all the attention on the Presidential race, of course, we have to remind ourselves to pay close attention also to other races, on every level. A President is stronger or weaker depending on the makeup of Congress. A President can sign a bill into law only if Congress puts it on his desk first. A President can veto a bill, but a strong Congress can override that veto. A President can nominate a judge, but the Senate can either confirm or reject that nominee. Congress matters, and every Congressional race deserves our attention.

Races at all levels of government matter, and voters need to do their homework to come to know the candidates.
State measures

Voters also need to pay attention to various ballot initiatives, State Constitutional Amendments, and other measures on which they will be asked to vote. There are a number of crucial state initiatives that impact the pro-life cause in the 2008 elections. Voters nationwide should talk to those they know in these states, educate them about these initiatives, and urge them to vote appropriately.

California: Proposition 4, or the Abortion Waiting Period and Parental Notification Initiative, is a proposal to amend the California Constitution. The initiative would prohibit abortion for unemancipated minors until 48 hours after a physician notifies the minor’s parent, legal guardian, or an alternative adult family member if the minor’s parents are abusive. An exception for medical emergency is provided.

When you consider that about a quarter of all the nation’s abortions are performed in California, and that studies have shown that parental involvement laws reduce the numbers of abortions, the passage of this measure can do a lot to reduce the abortion numbers in America. Voters in California should vigorously support Proposition 4.

South Dakota: Initiated Measure 11, or the Unborn Child Protection Initiative, is a proposal to amend South Dakota’s Constitution to ban all abortions in the state except for those performed because of rape, incest or a substantial and irreversible risk to the woman’s health.

Attorneys behind this measure believe it can be used to challenge Roe vs. Wade itself. Voters in South Dakota should vigorously support Initiated Measure 11.

Colorado: Amendment 48, the Colorado Definition of Person Initiative, defines a “person” from the time of fertilization. Voters should vote “Yes” on this initiative.

Washington: I-1000, or the Assisted Suicide Initiative, would legalize assisted suicide by allowing doctors to order lethal drug overdoses for terminally ill patients. Family members do not have to be informed regarding their loved ones. Voters should reject this initiative.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *