The polling industry and the public recognizes that polls are imperfect measures of political events and outcomes, and sometimes can be dead wrong. The 2020 presidential election is a good recent example of the extent to which Donald Trump’s ratings were significantly under-estimated, although no consensus has emerged about the exact reasons for these polling inaccuracies. The unwillingness of Republican voters to respond to polling was one factor that seemed to gain more acceptance in the polling industry.
Interestingly,
polls surrounding statewide and municipal elections do not appear to capture
the same level of scrutiny as national polls even though they are also
susceptible to various sources of bias.
The race for governor in Texas is a good example of how media and
polling activities can combine to artificially elevate the standing of a
favored candidate -- i.e., Gov. Gregg Abbott.
Let’s first discuss some two potential sources of polling bias, then
follow with a discussion of potential media bias surrounding this campaign.
Potential
Polling Bias
The most recent
poll was conducted in September 6-13, 2022 by The University of Texas at Tyler
Political Science Department and co-sponsored by The Dallas Morning News. [i] Methodological information about the poll is
presented on this web site which shows that 1,268 interviews were completed
with registered voters using a sample derived from two different sources: a
panel used for on-line surveys and a telephone listing used for telephone
interviews. Both English and
Spanish-language options were reportedly provided to the survey
respondents. In reviewing a survey tabulation
provided on their web site, the following two findings were observed:
·
One question
that asked respondents about their employment status during the last week prior
to the survey showed that the proportion of retired White respondents (42%) was
twice as high as Black (21%) and Latino (15%) respondents. Compared to other national polls
like the General Social Survey, this proportion of White respondents is
unusually high, and may artificially inflate the poll’s rating for Gov. Abbott
whose support comes primarily from White voters. Whether due to actual interviewing or weighting
adjustments, why were retired White respondents given so much weight or
presence in this poll?
· Potential Sampling Bias: The selection of poll respondents from two differences sampling sources or frames points to a potential sampling bias. Despite the detailed methodological steps that described the manner that these two sources were combined into one total sample with a margin of error of plus or minus 2.9 percent, one needs to recall that panel respondents are not usually selected at random and are usually paid incentives to complete surveys on a periodic basis, while telephone survey respondents are usually selected at random and not paid an incentive to participate in a survey. Also, online panel members are typically younger, more educated and have higher incomes than the general population, and often exclude people of color and immigrants – a profile that could also bias the poll ratings in favor of Gov. Abbott. [ii] Demographically speaking, these two groups of respondents are apples and oranges. Given this information, it would be helpful to know the proportion of Black and Latino poll respondents who were selected from a panel or the telephone listing to verify this potential sampling bias and its influence on the poll ratings.
Potential
Media Bias
·
A second
tab on the UT-Tyler web site asks respondents to identify their main source of
news, and shows that Spanish-language news – like Telemundo and Univision --
were used by an extremely small proportion (2%) of the poll respondents.
In Texas, this is highly unusual given the number of eligible immigrant
voters: 52 percent are Latino immigrants [iii] that past research confirms frequently use
Spanish-language news sources. Even
though the UT-Tyler poll methodology
explains that both English and Spanish-language options were provided in
the poll, it would be helpful to know the actual unweighted number of Latino
surveys that were completed in English and Spanish. Why? Because pollsters often state that
language options are provided in a survey, but that does not tell us the extent
to which these options were actually chosen by the survey respondents. If Texas
immigrant voter participation in the poll was inadvertently minimized due to
poorly implemented language options, one would expect Beto O’Rourke’s ratings
to be systematically lower since Texas immigrants tend to support Democratic
candidates. Again, a potential unearned benefit for Gov. Abbott.
·
The
recent televised debate between Gov. Abbott and Beto O’Rourke also revealed both
logistical and media bias that favored Gov. Gregg Abbott.
To begin, Gov. Abbott’s campaign deliberately defined the debate
logistics in his favor by scheduling the debate on a Friday evening that is
known to attract few audiences of potential voters and further required that no
live audience was present in the auditorium during the debate. Despite these limitations, an informative debate
still took place and provided viewers an opportunity to understand these two
candidates in more detail. It was clear, for example, that Beto O’Rourke
performed well by focusing on the
repeated failures of Gov. Abbott over the past eight years of his
administration – facts that were verifiable by external sources. By contrast,
Gov. Abbott focused on Beto’s “flip-flopping” on issues like gun control and alleged
statements by Beto (e.g. “Beto supports open borders,” “Beto supports
de-funding the police”) that were not supported by any facts presented by Gov. Abbott.
Interestingly, it was Gov. Abbott who actually took millions in funding from
law enforcement agencies in Texas to support his failed border wall project.[iv] The main outcome of the debate was Gov.
Abbott’s evasiveness and unwillingness to explain (a) his lack of
accountability for the Uvalde massacre; (b) why he did not taken decisive action
over the past eight years to avoid the recent energy crisis that cost the lives
of 700 Texas residents; [c] his lack of support for gun legislation that has
resulted in numerous mass killings during his administration; and (d) his
support for restrictive abortion laws. Thus, the debate was a significant
learning opportunity for its viewers.
Media bias, however, was evident in the follow-up report in The Dallas Morning News by Gromer Jeffers [v] who was one of the panel members that presented questions during the debate. Jeffers concluded based on insights from other experts that the debate outcome was fairly inconsequential and not likely to change the minds of Texas voters unless Beto was able to muster strong voter turnout – which would have more significance on Election Day than “throwing jabs at a debate.” While one cannot argue about the value of voter turnaround, it seems unwarranted, and perhaps a sort of media bias, to describe the recent debate as “jabs” thrown at a debate. These “jabs” were very informative in distinguishing the two candidates: Gov. Abbott as the incumbent who blames others for his failures over the past eight years vs. Beto O’Rourke who voices strong support for policies that will improve the quality of life for Texans.
In conclusion,
the Texas Poll results suggest that Beto O’Rourke continues to face an uphill
battle in beating Gov. Abbott in this highly competitive race. The media’s consistent coverage regarding the
polling advantage that Gov. Abbott currently enjoys is clearly benefiting his
campaign but also likely to discourage voter turnout by supporters of Beto O’Rourke.
But history tells us that polling results are not infallible and sometimes
undeserving of the confidence accorded them by media sources. While there is some reason to believe that the Texas Poll ratings for Gov. Abbott may be inflated, there does not appear to be much concern about obtaining an objective, independent critique of the methodology used. Beto
O’Rourke’s campaign has been consistently on-target in documenting the failures
of the Abbott administration over the past eight years and is aggressively reaching
out to various segments of potential Texas voters. By contrast, Gov. Abbott’s well-funded campaign
is driven by advertising messages that are false and designed to portray Beto O'Rourke as a governor who will wreck the Texas energy industry, worsen border security problems, and promote a socialist agenda. If the recent Texas Poll ratings have been
artificially inflating Gov. Abbott’s standing and Beto continues his successful
strategy of relying on the facts and focusing on voter turnout, Texans may witness
an unexpected surprise this November.
It should be
noted that these concerns for potential methodological biases in the Sept. 2022 Texas Poll were emailed to the poll director on Oct. 3, 2022 using the email posted on the UT-Tyler
web site. No response has been received at this writing.
[i] UT Tyler Political Science Department, Center for Opinion Research. Accessed at: https://www.uttyler.edu/politicalscience/pollingcenter/
[ii]
Rincon, E.T. (2020). The Culture of Research, Publisher: The Writer’s
Marq.
[iii]
Noe-Bustamente, L. and Budiman, A. (2020 March). Most of the 23 million
immigrants eligible to vote in 2020 election live in just five states. Pew
Research Center, Accessed at: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/03/03/most-of-the-23-million-immigrants-eligible-to-vote-in-2020-election-live-in-just-five-states/
[iv]
Kriel, L. and Trevizo, P. Texas has
spent billions of dollars on border security. But what taxpayers got in return
is a mystery. Texas Tribune, Accessed
at: https://www.texastribune.org/2022/04/18/texas-border-security-spending/
[v]
Jeffers, Jr. G. (2022 October). Abbott, O’Rourke near finish line. Accessed
at: https://www.pressreader.com/usa/the-dallas-morning-news
