Skip to main content

The problem with polling for Libertarian candidates

Civitas has recently released its latest poll on the North Carolina governor's race, which shows Libertarian candidate Michael Munger at only 2%, not the 4-6% he's been garnering in the polls at Public Policy Polling.

The problem is one of high variability when you're polling below 8-10%.

The Civitas poll included 598 likely voters, of which only twelve expressed a preference for Munger. A total of 86 voters expressed no opinion. Sampling becomes problematic--hence the perennial qualifier of margin for error--at the 5% and below range. Had three more voters expressed a preference for Munger, he would have been rounded up to 3%. You have to wonder about the reliability and validity of such polls for third-party candidates.

However, there are two particularly interesting items in the Civitas poll: (1) the poll confirms that Munger enjoys stronger support among African-American men than might generally be expected from a Libertarian candidate; and (2) the poll shows Munger pulling 2% of Democrats and 6% of unaffiliated voters--but no Republicans.

Clearly the idea that the Libertarians in North Carolina are going to act as some sort of GOP spoiler needs to be examined more closely.

This is also the case in the new Survey USA 30 June Poll that gives Munger 4% statewide. This poll suggests that Munger voters are three times more likely to favor Barack Obama than John McCain for the Presidency. [Granted, this answer could also have been biased by the lack of an option to pick LP candidate Bob Barr.]

Survey USA also reports that Munger draws equally from Dem and GOPer voters (but twice as many independents). What's new here is that Munger voters are twice as likely to be pro-abortion rights as not, and spread themselves evenly over the spectrum of liberal-moderate-conservative.

Curiouser and curiouser....

Comments

It's based on nothing other than having lived there a long time, but I doubt there are many Republicans in North Carolina who would give serious thought to voting Libertarian. They tend to be business conservatives and ex-Democrats who crossed the aisle over race in the '70s.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...