Thoughts about the MN Independence Party

Jeff,

Thank you for the questions. I am traveling so my answers
will need to be abbreviated.

On the margin of error, this is a case
where knowing a little can get you in trouble. First, what everyone refers to as
"margin of error" relates to sampling error. This isn't a minor point because of
what we know about sampling. We never get 100% of our sample and therefore have
to weight and make other adjustments. The conventional margin of sampling error
for a sample of 701 is 3.7; we listed a margin of sampling error that built in
an adjustment for design error and therefore was 5.8. What we did is
statistically more accurate. Rather than being alarmed, consumers of polls
should feel more confidence owing to our caution.

I will say that I have
been impressed by the level of interest in some of the more technical issues and
will be expanding our "About the Survey" section that we attach to the end of
our poll reports. If you are interested, you can find it here --
http://www.hhh.umn.edu/centers/cspg/humphrey_polling/pdf/HHH_MPR_May_GovernorsRace.pdf


On party identification, the issue is how you handle "leaners" --
that is, folks who initially do not indicate a party preference but are then
asked a following about which party they lean toward. Research shows that the
leaners usually vote that direction. Coding the leaners with partisans is the
standard approach among survey researchers.

Take care,

LJ

After writing a entry on the poll conducted last week by the MPR News and
Humphrey Institute I was wondering if you would take a few moments to answers a
few questions concerning the results?
I should like to note that an answer
you provide will be share with my loyal readers, all four and ½ of them.

Under my presumptuous assumption that you would take a few moments I
have included my questions below.

Thank you very much for your time.
Very Respectfully
Jeffrey M. Johnson

Questions
Many of my
fellow bloggers have taken umbrage at the Margin of Error in the first poll and
have noted that many results sort of fall into within the margin of error. I
have noted that while there is a slim chance for results like Dayton’s ten point
lead over Kelliher could be reversed the reality of these polls is they are
better at tracking trends than giving exact numbers. We look to follow on Polls
to monitor if Dayton’s lead is decreasing, staying the same, or increasing.
How often is MPR News and the Humphrey Institute planning on running similar
polls to this one?
Are you planning to revamp your Poll before the next one
is conducted to address the criticism of the first poll? Would any changed
effect the validity of the first poll?

In the first poll there were
three things that caught my attention; the poor showing of Matt Entenza, the
high number of Undecided/Refused/Other, and the extremely high number of people
who identified with a Party Affiliation.

Under the auspices that Matt
Entenza is going to make a strong effort to move his campaign forward I have
noted that were he pulls his support from as the Primary Election gets closer
will go a long way to determine the winner. Would you agree that if he starts
pulling votes primarily from the undecided pool of voters than that goes a long
way to help Dayton’s Campaign?
I am under the current belief that today
Kelliher really needs an active Entenza in the primaries to defeat Dayton under
the guise the Entenza/Dayton should spilt the so called unhappy voters. Would
you agree that is the key trend to watch in the DFL primaries?

As
polarized as this election appears to be watching most media reports were you
surprised to see such a large pool of undecided voters?

Party
identification in the State of Minnesota has historically been in the high
twenties to mid thirties in the past decade or so, what would you attribute such
a large growth in these numbers over the past year?

While not mentioned
specifically in your first release, how much support do you find out there for
third parties, not just the IP, but other parties like Libertarians, Green, and
so on? I had felt going into this year’s elections this would be the break out
year for smaller parties, primarily at a state level, but that swelling movement
seems to have greatly dissipated as we moved forward this year. On a personal
note I am very disheartened to already be hearing “wait until 2012” from people
in these small parties. What do you think end their movement so early this year?