Fight disinformation. Get a daily recap of the facts that matter. Sign up for the free Mother Jones newsletter.


CELL PHONE UPDATE….A new Pew study confirms something that Nate Silver wrote about a couple of days ago: We’ve finally gotten to the point where there’s a serious cell phone bias in political polling:

The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press has conducted three major election surveys with both cell phone and landline samples since the conclusion of the primaries….A virtually identical pattern is seen across all three surveys: In each case, including cell phone interviews resulted in slightly more support for Obama and slightly less for McCain, a consistent difference of two-to-three points in the margin.

Back in 2004 the cell phone effect wasn’t big enough to worry about, but cell phone penetration has continued to build, and now it is. A 2-3 point margin is pretty significant in an election cycle where the two candidates have rarely been more than five points apart.

At this point, I think political polls probably ought to routinely disclose whether they include cell phones in their calling samples. If they don’t, they should be assumed to be at least moderately inaccurate. They can probably fix part of the problem by overweighting young people in their landline sample, but that’s an iffy workaround. It’s true that cell phone polling is more expensive since it has to be done by human beings, but I’m afraid that’s going to be the price of entry for serious pollsters in the future.

And if that means fewer polls? Consider it a feature, not a bug.

ONE MORE QUICK THING:

Or at least we hope. It’s fall fundraising time, and we’re trying to raise $250,000 to help fund Mother Jones’ journalism during a shorter than normal three-week push.

If you’re reading this, a fundraising pitch at the bottom of an article, you must find our team’s reporting valuable and we hope you’ll consider supporting it with a donation of any amount right now if you can.

It’s really that simple. But if you’d like to read a bit more, our membership lead, Brian Hiatt, has a post for you highlighting some of our newsroom's impressive, impactful work of late—including two big investigations in just one day and covering voting rights the way it needs to be done—that we hope you'll agree is worth supporting.

payment methods

ONE MORE QUICK THING:

Or at least we hope. It’s fall fundraising time, and we’re trying to raise $250,000 to help fund Mother Jones’ journalism during a shorter than normal three-week push.

If you’re reading this, a fundraising pitch at the bottom of an article, you must find our team’s reporting valuable and we hope you’ll consider supporting it with a donation of any amount right now if you can.

It’s really that simple. But if you’d like to read a bit more, our membership lead, Brian Hiatt, has a post for you highlighting some of our newsroom's impressive, impactful work of late—including two big investigations in just one day and covering voting rights the way it needs to be done—that we hope you’ll agree is worth supporting.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate