Thursday, October 26, 2006

KVOA/Zimmerman Poll Results

Gifford is still maintaining her lead which in this poll has her up by ten points.

Here's the breakdown:


We anticipate the release of additional polling results that are said to call the race much closer. However, we expected less than the ten point spread reported here.

Polling occured October 20-23. We are still looking for the N and other process data.

23 comments: said...

Zimmerman is a Democrat hack for a pollster. So, if Graf is ahead in a poll that she's done, that would have been amazing and be REALLY, REALLY BAD for Gabby. If Randy's not ahead, that is to be expected because she's a Dem hack. I'm surprised that the Star & KVOA would choose somebody so biased to conduct their polling. You'd think that they would at least make an attempt to be unbiased. To show that they at least attempt to be unbiased, most national polls, use a Republican and a Democrat together to conduct their polls.

It’s good for Randy that Gabby is below 50% and Randy is within 10 points while there is a larger undecided than his deficit. If he's down to a Dem in one of Zimmerman’s biased Dem polls, that will be a factor that gives him at least a few points, plus of course the margin of error could put him over the top. Hopefully, Zimmerman releases her polling sample this time, but don't hold your breath. Remember that Randy's got a 5 point cushion in registration advantage, and 5000 more Republicans than Democrats requested early ballots for the General. So, she'll have to really work hard to make up for that regardless of what the poll says when they release more info on it tonight.

Randall Holdridge said...

Silk purses out of sows' ears. The speciality of 206isCancer when in positive mood.

In negative voice, 206 is a perfect reptile of slander.

sirocco said...

So I guess in 206's eyes this is a no lose for Graf -- if he's ahead it's wonderful, and if he's behind, well, we can ignore the data.

I think I'll take that approach with the next poll -- if Graf is within 20 it's bacause the poll is rigged, if he's not within 20 that's great news!

BTW, I suspect a large number of those R's who requested early ballots got them to vote for Giffords, not Graf.

As an additional point, this poll once again show's almost no change for Graf, the major difference being how well Giffords is doing versus Undecided. My recollection is every poll (other than the EL one, a clear outlier, or just an out-and-out bad poll) has had Graf somewhere between 34 and 38%, is that right? If so, his change in numbers is always within the MOE. said...

Not so, that supposed poll done by NARAL had Randy at only 25% or something ridiculous like that.

But these numbers are good for Randy. He's within 10 points in a Dem poll that probably heavily overweighed Dems. I could be wrong. They could actually release the internals on the polling sample for the first time ever. But like I said, I doubt it. WITHOUT INTERNALS ON THE POLLING SAMPLE, A POLL IS WORTHLESS! Let's see if that's the case here. said...

Oh did I mention that WITHOUT INTERNALS ON THE POLLING SAMPLE, A POLL IS WORTHLESS! Oh, sorry, I guess that I did.

Randall Holdridge said...

206 --

Just give us the low down now. What's your Hallowe'en costume?

Roadkill maybe?

I'd love to know what others on this site think 206 might dress as for trick'r'treating.

Randall Holdridge said...

Oh, just for the record, on the last KVOA/Star poll, there was a wealth of internal/cross tab information on the poll, not surprisingly in the Star, but rather on KVOA's website.

I'll assume the same will happen this time, and maybe the Star will do better. But just as a matter of fact, 206, the internals were there; inquiring minds found them.

206 might look good in a KMBlue suit?

Framer said...


Fortunately we have a few more polls coming up. From what I saw, the previous KVOA Star poll had some crosstabs, but did not release their methodology, especially as party makeup was concerned.

Of course the bare minumum for a statistical sampling of a poll of the size of the district is 400 to 500. I believe the Star poll was 500, so the crosstabs are almost statistically irrelevant, even if the overall percentage was accurate. That is why most serious polls will do 800 or better to get accurate crosstabs. The Zogby poll due out Tuesday should give us that type of smaple size.

That's the type of thing that I wonder about. If you take a crosstab of "How are men voting?" the Margin of Error approaches 8%. Yet they waste time and money on trying to report this without a large enough sample. It has been this, along with the prior refusal to release methodology that has me wondering about how much effort has went into securing a random sample for the local polls. I would feel the same about a pro-Graf Poll as well

I could be wrong, of course, but I am real interested in Zogby's numbers.

Randall Holdridge said...


Yup, every new poll is grist for the mill, and like you, I can't wait 'til the next one -- but it really is true, that hackneyed saying, that the only poll that counts comes on election day. That takes all the fun out of our spewing and spitting, of course -- Reality always sucks.

But you raise an interesting question which I ask seriously, and would like to have answered:

Suppose I were paying a lot of money to have a poll conducted -- whether as a candidate, a party, a news organization, etc -- why on earth would I want any feedback except the most precise and accurate information I could gather?

Why, for instance would KVOA and the Star demand anything from a pollster they were paying other than the most fair and thorough and accurate prediction that could be gathered? As they are staking their credibility as news gatherers on the accuracy of their information, why seek anything other than accuracy?

Similarly, why would a candidate pay for a false poll, a poll of zero use, strategically or tactically. I can see why they might keep results secret, but not why they would pay to be lied to.

So then, doesn't the accuracy of polling like this depend upon the expertise of those commissioning the poll to make the best of the polling service they've hired? So, who for instance at the Star and at KVOA brings this expertise to bear on the design of the poll? What about the other polls?

Accordingly, we're no longer interested in individual polls, but in how this or that poll compares to this or that poll. I smell more salesmanship than science.

I think it's maybe all a trick, and I might consider offers from investors in a polling firm I might start up.

Anonymous said...

"Suppose I were paying a lot of money to have a poll conducted -- whether as a candidate, a party, a news organization, etc -- why on earth would I want any feedback except the most precise and accurate information I could gather?"

Even heard of disenchanting the base, Randall? Volunteers and voters turn out for close races. They don't turn out for lost causes. Come on. You're an esteemed Tucson weekly journalist (I use the term loosely) so you know how this stuff works. Pre-election polls and exit polls show your political hack ahead and it dissuades other voters from showing up. It was supposed to work in 2000 and 2004, and it almost did. Too bad for you there are other ways of getting information than network TV news. All groups/factions have their preferential outcome and most polls do nothing more than re-affirm that outcome.

Don't get cocky, Randall (Proverbs 16:18). You've got a few key things working against you: namely Prop 107. Need I remind you of what happened in "marriage amendment" states in 2004? Your boy got whooped! You'd better pray to God (or nature, or the cosmos, or whatever it is you pray to) that the marriage issue has been deflated and people don't care about it any longer.

Randall Holdridge said...

You're right about one thing, Anonymous. I was the best bbok reviewer the Tucson Weekly ever had, most knowledgeable and best writer.

I got cast overboard when Doug Biggers sold the paper off, but that was their loss, not mine. No other book reviewer in Weekly history has had such a wide international "pick up" on-line; probably no other writer, bar none.

Hey, Boegle, you can figure out how to reach me.

john said...

“pray ... that the marriage issue has been deflated and people don't care about it any longer.”

I think a recent decision from the New Jersey Supreme Court took care of any complacency that there might have been on Prop 107. New Jersey has supplied the perfect elixir for the pro-107 camp.

Kralmajales said...

This poll just confirms all the other ones 206. Giffords is leading in republican leaning district...and big! That should tell us a lot about the mood of the nation and the voters in our state.

All I can say is look out...and now I am wondering about what effect this will have on Kyl?

I was wondering why Kyl and McCain endorsed Graf before and now I have it. They knew that Kyl desperately needs good turnout in Republican dominated districts around the state. If Pederson pulls even here or better due to turnout, then it could kill Kyl in a tight race...especially when turnout will be high in demo parts of the state.

I am wondering what polls like this say about turnout overall...and what this means for Kyl.

Feel that icy chill? The weather is getting cooler.

GOPinsider said...

It's funny how no one is insisting on internals from R.T. Gregg who claims Graf is only down by 5.

Why do you only want internals on polls you don't like?

Kralmajales said...

HA..well said GOPinsider...

I am seeing a fight for the soul of the Republican party right now. Harsh rhetoric on illegals and Hispanics as well has started to push Latinos away from the Republican party. A recent poll showed Bush and the party used to have remarkable support from the Latino community, and now it is all gone. POOF! One thing I gave George Bush was that he "got it" when he was governor and has still held on to the belief that we need a guest worker plan and a pathway to citizenship.

The GOP has pushed gays and lesbians away from the republican fold with the Christian right. Reagan used to attract LGBT voters and there was a fairly stong Log Cabin more.

Now...the tough on values crowd has been broadsider by the corruption and the sex scandals.

The GOPs very base is disgusted now...the only ones left. That is why the ads are tough against illegals and tough against gays and lesbians.

There aren't many left at the party and you have to entertain your "late" guests...the only ones you have left.

Trying to be more civil Mr. Murchison. I read your post from a few streams back. I get angry yes. This used to be my party. I believed in Reagan...and now...look at it? I meant the bigoted word, because that is how the ads and the rhetoric appears. I don't think "all republicans are bigots" but look how you all show yourselves. Also, read the comments on the Citizen blogs when an illegal issue comes up.

Unreal...with this, the scandals, a phony war that costs billions, and I am expected to be civil? I get angry because I just don't know what is wrong with some of you. Reagan believed in a measure of tolerance and was unflappable. He had problems and scandals of his own, but holy smokes.

The GOP shows me no tolerance or gives me no hope that I should ever ever ever go back. Where is the civility on the Republican side of the fence?

Anonymous said...

“Reagan used to attract LGBT” Say what? Where were you living during the 80’s, in Paraguay? Ever heard of a group called Act Up? You may have some documentation for this comment but I sure missed the love between the LGBT community and Reagan.

Kralmajales said...

Of course I have heard of Act Up, but at that time there were a large number of gay republicans. In fact, I once read a very good public opinion article that had gays and lesbians only SLIGHTLY more likely to vote Democrat.

Why? Gays and lesbians like much of the Republican agenda in some ways. Peace through strength, lower taxes, lower deficits, and the business rhetoric. All that was BEFORE elements like the Christian Coalition formed and the Moral Majority that started condemning their lifestyle to get votes.

Honestly...not lying here. There was a time when gays and lesbians broke about 55-45 demo to aint that way now.

Marco Alatorre said...

Right, nobody will vote Republican anymore! Only Democrats will be elected and we will vanquish those evil white males!

Yes, we will now have to figure ways to punish the anglos. Lets start thinking of new laws that will disproportionately affect the evil people.

I don't believe the silly polls, especislly ones published by liberals on the eve on an election.

Just vote and forget about the poll. We will see soon enough.

Kralmajales said...


Heck, come on. My grandfather retired a hard-working, union dues paying welder. He worked all over the United States, traveled, worked hard to provide for my mom. My father also in construction, rose through the trades to become a project manager, my mom a secretary all her life.

I once believed, under Reagan and Bush I that the Republican party had the answers for Americans like those in my family. I hated unions because I thought they skimmed money off their paychecks for nothing. I liked the Horatio Alger story that Republicans told and how giving my money back and decreasing the size of government would help me and my family to be better Americans.

Look what happens when govt. is cut to the bones? And look very very closely at what this brand of Republican did to the size and scope of govt. Collecting large amounts of tax dollars from the middle class and passing govt. responsibilities on to private companies is socialism. It is taking tax payer dollars and giving them to corporations...not based on the market...but based on who has the power to schmooze the best.

I believed in competition...and nothing I see with this brand of Republican has anything at all to do with competition.

They then cut FEMA, Mine inspection safety, and a host of regulations meant to protect people. All under competition and that it might lead, in the long run to that competition that would put the bad guys out of busines.

We ended up with a govt. that created and enlarged under the guise of terrorism. We ended up with a bare bones govt. that did not protect our workers. We ended up with a Govt. that sat back and watched as companies like
Enron stole away peoples pensions.

All under the theory that privitatization and less government is better.

They didn't decrease government overall.

They didn't decrease goverment spending.

Our important functions of government are stripped and miners die in the cold black toxic filled air because no one was their to inspect the safety.

FEMA is cut back and back...and when disaster calls and Americans need is not there to help.

Marco, the liberalism you decry might cost you a buck or two more...but I would trade anything for that right now if it could save us from what this Republican party has done to our country. said...

Quoting Kralmajales: “Why? Gays and lesbians like much of the Republican agenda in some ways. Peace through strength, lower taxes, lower deficits, and the business rhetoric. All that was BEFORE elements like the Christian Coalition formed and the Moral Majority that started condemning their lifestyle to get votes. Honestly...not lying here. There was a time when gays and lesbians broke about 55-45 demo to aint that way now.”

Let’s see 1-2 percent of the population identifies itself as gay or lesbian or other deviant sexual behavior groups. If the Republican Party was getting 45% of this group, that would amount to less than 1% of the total population. Saying, that people who identify themselves with these deviant lifestyle choices vote at the same rate or even higher than that, it is hardly significant enough for Republicans to care. Especially with the numbers of people who go to church on a regular basis and go to churches who teach correctly that homosexuality is a sin. Depending on the area, 25% in the lowest State, Oregon, to well over half in the highest Bible Belt states and Utah, go to church at least once a month. Statistically, I’d give up 1 percent to gain all of those other votes any day. The problem with the Dems is just that. They want that full 2 percent of deviants so badly, that they’ll give up everybody who goes to a church which teaches that morality is actually a good thing.

The other funny thing is that just like you said, “peace through strength, lower taxes, lower deficits”, and other things like that will always keep people of all types voting Republican.

Marco Alatorre said...


I always took Reagan and GW Bush with a grain of salt. I knew that they could only do so much, given the budget constraints of the time and the Cold War. But they did get us away from tax and spend.

Yes, there is a lot of pork in the budget. And yes, there are both Republican and Democrat hogs at the trough. And yes, we need to put a stop to these excesses now.

But you cannot blame all the country's ills on Republicans. Remember, Clinton was president during Enron and Worldcom. And the sad fact is that both parties have members that are on the take.

But Randy Graf didn't do any of those things you accuse Republicans of doing. And those Republicans that you mention, well they supported Steve Huffman in the primary, not Randy Graf.

Randy Graf is honest about his positions. You know where he stands. He is also a practical person who can recognize what is feasible and what is not.

Gabrielle Giffords, on the other hand, just tells you what you want to hear.

So, who is the most likely one to schmooze and divert taxpayer dollars to their pockets?

Randy Graf is driven by his principles and says what he means.

A schmoozer has no pesky principles to get in the way on the trip to the bank.

Today our economy is robust. country is not falling apart. Things are not nearly as bad as they were during the Cold War.

Yes, we really need to resolve Iraq and the terror issues and we need to assure worker safety and public safety. I do not consider these to be liberal issues.

There are many other legitimate issues we could spend money on, but there is only so much we can do with tax and spend, before we trigger a runaway inflation as we saw in the late '70s or a punishing recession such as the ones that followed. And you know who is punished the most by inflation and recession.

Kralmajales said...

Go back to my original post 206iscancer. I am talking about a fight for the soul of the Republican party and this entire blog and its comments exemplifies that fight.

Your party, yes, has alienated gays and lesbians from its fold. Not a huge population, no, but what you said...calling them deviants just echos the bigotry of some in the Republican party. Add to that the fact that you are driving away the fastest growing population of Americans (Latinos) and add to that what I said about the Christian Coalition. Even they have wonder about what the Republican party stands for when it stands proud for the Enrons, the Worldcoms, and that secret gifts of contracts (no bid mind you) to business.

Abramoff, Abromoff, Abromoff.

Ralph Reed, Ralph Reed, Ralph Reed.

Add to that the mockery of the Christian base by those in the administration themselves...Rove's staff among them. Calling them wackos and taking them for granted.

Last, you should be more concerned with your battle with the RINOS. The RINOS are starting to look more like the Bob Doles, the Ronald Reagans, and even Bush's father. They are starting to look like the man and woman with two children trying to afford college. Who voted Republican once, but see your deficits and your hypocrisy.

Marco, wonderful post, but there aren't many like Randy Graf...and I don't mind that.

It is the Steve Huffmans of the world and his backers that make your party what it is. When they leave, you all look like a tiny tiny tiny group of folks with not enough mandate or support to ever govern.

But, hey, you have your principles...and I respect that.

Kralmajales said...

Oh..206iscancer...that last bit you quoted from me is not all what will keep people voting Republican. Especially the deficit part. See, you all don't really believe in smaller government at all. You just don't want it spent on social programs or education, you want it spent on the border patrol, Raytheon, and wars over sees.

The deficit is ENORMOUS. You can't grow your way out of that. NO way. You do the typical thing. Grow the economy on govt. spending for defense and privatization, you cut taxes, the deficits creep up, and then people wack you and you leave it to the Dems to clean up.

Makes most republican strategists laugh...(I was one once...I know), but it is wrong, unethical, and is what is totally wrong with America.