Cspan2, television for serious readers. Good evening im john kenyon im the executive director of the city of Literature Organization prayed welcome tonight slip talks events featuring me the author joseph campbell. Botox is a series presented by the Iowa City Public Library featuring authors of books featuring political role of social engagement. In his new book, pulling failure in the u. S. President ial election, campbell looks at the long history of polling and its failures. You may recall dooey defeats truman or the shock of 2016 Election Results, campbell goes deeper. Looking at how polling methods in the way polls are covered in the media have affected our National Politics for decades. Campbell spent 20 years in journalism become a professor in Communication Studies program in America University in washington d. C. Hes also a writer historian, media critic and blogger. Hes authored seven books including getting it wrong, debunking the greatest myths in american journalism in 1995, the year of the future began. Tonight campbell talk but his brandnew book from the university of California Press, lost in a gallop. Following his opening remarks, i will moderate a q a section. Those watching live on crowd cast can submit a question by asking questions the bottom of the screen at any time during our program. Now, i would like to welcome w joseph campbell. Stomach thank you its great to be here. Its great to be back in iowa city if virtually. I spent productive. Time, about two and half years ago in iowa city going to the Gallup Organization papers in the university of iowas special collection. It was a very in revealing business. I must say i had a good time in iowa city. Wish i could be there in person rather than virtually. But this will have to do for no now. One of the surprises, mild surprises, about the gallup collection at the university was a small folder of cartoons about polls. These were cartoons were apparently collected by what of George Gallups sons. The dates of some these polling cartoons was after his death in 1984. I believe it was one of his sons to collect the cartoon. I have a few i would like to show. On the program tonight. Going to the next slide. This is a mildly amusing cartoon here in the wall street journal. Im not sure of the dates, but nonetheless it is kind of amusing. So is the next 12. A woman says, ive got to see doctor gallup ive changed my mind presumably a pole responde responder. And then the next cartoon is one that appears in my book, lawton gallup, early in the book on page nine disappears. The cartoonist, Richard Wright came up with this amusing characterization of rogue posters and when pollsters go bad they asked things like who cares what you think in response. With interactions. Such a small collection of cartoons but nonetheless amusing and kind of revealing. Tonights presentation will focus on a few cases, although not all. A few cases of polling failures in u. S. President ial election. And they will take up a few takeaways are reminders about election polls. I will offer a couple of suggestions what to keep in mind what to look for this fall. And then we will go to a q a. The presentation is drawn from i just published book, lawton the gallup, failure in u. S. President ial elections. In its book was brought out recently by the California Press publisher from work mls through four book projects. This talk tonight will consider a few cases i mentioned, specifically those from 1948, 1980, 2012, 2016. Pulling errors in those president ial elections. As are not a complete universe but it covers some of the betterknown ones. To the next slide, that one picks up dooey defeats truman election of 1948. As an epic pole failure. In which the polls got it completely and utterly wrong. George gallup and other pollsters forecast a certain victory for the republican candidate, thomas e dooey. And dooey ran what i call a glide path campaign. He very seldom evoked controversial points of view. He tried to smoothly run through the fall election, the campaign, and not upset anybody or take any controversial views or positions. Whereas harry truman ran a very aggressive campaign. And truman was recognized as being behind in the polls. In fact one pollster, Eleanor Roper one of the seniors and Public Opinion research and at 72 years ago today, 1948 that he was so certain that thomas ide dooey was going to win the election he was no longer going to be reporting polling. He would take polls but he just would not report the polls because he didnt think they added too much of the understanding of the race in 1948. That was emblematic. Ropers point of view is emblematic of the supreme they had income unchecked outcome of the election. Harry truman on by 4. 5 Percentage Points. After the election, one of the comments was the first time truman was the first candidate to lose in a gallop, but when in a wallet. Or. 5 is tory us, is fairly modest but pretty clear as well. And i think, although it is hard to measure the shock of 1948 was probably greater than that of just four years ago in 2016 when donald trump won unexpectedly. The shock will really ran deep. Emblematic of the shock was the front page of the chicago tribune, one of the early additions on the day after the election that declared dooey beat truman is one of the most memorable, Iconic Images of american politics. Harry truman was on his way back to washington from missouri and had to stop in st. Louis pretty had to stop at Union Station in st. Louis. They gave the front page of the chicago tribune. And he held it aloft of what is a very memorable photograph. After words journalists really criticize himself having delegated the responsibility their legwork to the polls that they relied too heavily on pole poles. So, what went wrong in 1948 . A number of factors contributed to dooeys defeat of Harry Trumans upset victory. One of those factors was the fact that one of the thirdparty candidates, the Democratic Party split into three factions. It was the mainstream of dented democrats represented by harry truman. Then there was a progressive wing that Henry Wallace former Vice President under Franklin Roosevelt was a leader of. And then a third split in the Democratic Party was the states right party. And it was opposed to harry truman civil rights measures, and broke off and formed a separate party led by strong thurman of south carolina. During the election, the support for the Progressive Party dwindled dramatically. In the beneficiary lost support with harry truman and his campaign. That is one factor. Another explanation for what went wrong in 1948 was the pollsters stopped polling pretty close to the election by midtolate october. They were done with the polls. Announced in september is not going to take enough pulling resorts and a longer, he did conduct a poll late in october, but did not show much in the change so did not work for the pole at all. The pollsters figured not much was going to change and they did not continue polling right up until the end. This is a lesson by the way pollsters learn and relearn every so often in president ial elections. Another contributing factor probably was that Republican Voters were so confident the thomas e dooey was going to win, the hull in the press all said he was headed for victory, that many Republican Voters decided not to turn out, decided not to vote. That overconfidence translated into a deficit for thomas dooey. Those are some of the factors to explain the loss of doing 1948, the last of the pollsters as well. We move on to 1980 which was a another surprise outcome when news organizations entered polling realm in large numbers worn out doing their own polls or commission their own polls and polling by then, four years ago was more numerous than ever. In the polls indicated that president jimmy carter was locked into a very tight race with republican Ronald Reagan. In the polls were consistent in saying so. And yet, on election day, Ronald Reagan wins in a near landslide. In an outcome no pollster had anticipated. And after words, pollsters bickered and quarreled among themselves as to what went wron wrong. This spilled over and usually so into the public realm is the article from the Los Angeles Times suggest pollsters spat on why they aired so badly prayed what went wrong in 1980 . One of the factors was the fact that the only debate between the two major party candidates, reagan and carter took place very late in the campaign a week before the election. That seemed to have been a factor in tipping support to Ronald Reagan. The people could see he conducted himself well on the stage with carter. And he was not really as wowed in the centric as many people thought he was. That was reassuring. Probably contributed to reagans sizable victory. The other factors he pollster again did not pull up until the very end for they realize they ought to do that but for various reasons did not continue polling until the final weekend of the 1980 election. And also there is a Third Party CandidateJohn Anderson was running as an independent he was a republican running as an independent. For a while during the campaign the fall, it looked like he is to drain a lot of votes Ronald Reagan. This election day approached, anderson support dwindled and reagan was a beneficiary. Those are some of the factors that explain the unanticipated outcome, the near landslide that no pollster anticipated 40 years ago. You can take on the next line john . Stomach the next case is that of 2012 when the Gallup Organization was essentially alone and calling the election or estimating the election and mitch romneys favor. Throughout the campaign, gallup poll and kept signaling that mitt romney was ahead by four, five, six Percentage Points. And at the end of the campaign, gallup suggested was very tight race that romney was one point ahead. And in the end, president barack obama wins election at the real embarrassment for the Gallup Organization. It was also the year in which nay silver confirmed his status as an election or goal. In 2008 he had, through a poll based statistical model that he developed, estimated the outcome accurate in 49 out of 50 states. That was in 2008. In 2012, accurately forecast the outcome and he was recognized as a statistics guru, forecasting guru that help seal his reputation. Enter signaled the rise of Data Journalism as a way to also interpret polls and Public Opinion. maybe not as deep as 1948 put shock that night ran very deep because Hillary Clinton was widely expected to one the presidency and perhaps fairly easily, and what happened in 2016 is key polls in Battle Ground states, particularly the upper midwest, wisconsin, michigan, and pennsylvania, looked like they were going to give the outcome to Hillary Clinton, and had she won the three states she would have had enough electoral votes to win the election. Instead donald trump narrowly wins wisconsin, michigan and pennsylvania, and also takes Battle Ground states such as florida, north carolina, and ohio, and that combination of states swept him to the presidency. Electoral college victory. Hillary clinton clearly won the popular vote but trump won the Electoral College vote. What went wrong in 2016 . An argument still being discussed and arguments on the their side or many side being made but nonetheless appears that polls in these states either ends their polling too early or failed to weight their percentages, failed to weight their results in a statistical adjustments that pollsters inevitably mack. Failed to statistically adjust for college ed noncollege educated voters who went to trump fairly heavily. That is one interpretation of some of these erratic polls in key midwestern States States ao pretty clear that trump picked up undecidedded voters in large numbers toward the end of the race and he had more undecided swinging to him than Hillary Clinton had swinging to her. So that combination of factors was enough to probably tip the Electoral College to donald trump. And it is a scenario that in people suggest could happen again, could happen again in 2016. My research into polling failure in president ial elections suggest no two Polling Centers are the same either so not likely well have a car been copy of 2016 this year. But well see in eight or nine weeks. What do thats case tell us . What are takeaways and reminders . Obviously pretty rare for a president ial election not to be characterized by some sort of polling dispute. Polling controversies are common place in president ial elections and he welcome expect to see them this year. The types of polling failure, the variety is not the same. We have seen just in this brief presentation four different types of polling failures. Theres the epic failure of 1948. Theres the landslide that pollsters dud not foresee in 1980. Theres the venerable pollster who get is wrong, the Gallup Organization in 1980. I mean, 2012. And also, the another type of polling failure are polls in key states that upset the national outcome. As what happened in 2016. Wisconsin, michigan and pennsylvania. Its also interesting that polling to the end of the campaign through the last weekend before the voting, before election day, is a lesson that not all pollsters have learn or always put into effect. We see this happen time and again. Saw it happen in 1948 and a few key polls in 2016. And another takeaway is that polling failures often correlate to journalistic failures, and in the sense that journalists often take their lead from polls, from a preelection poll. Polls are central to oh how journalists understand and interpret president ial campaigns. It is essential that polls are stolen how they set and fix and pursue the campaign narrative. So when polls mess up, journalism can falter, too. So journalistic failure is often equated to polling failure. Its something that we dont always keep in mind. Finally, what might we see in 2020 . What are we likely to see this jeer in polls will be more numerous than ever. Seems like its hard to escape the polling deluge and were only in september. Eight weeks away. And even now poll results seem to be all over the place. Real clear politics, an enveriable and very evenhanded political aggregation site just today posted several polls that show joe biden is ahead of donald trump by a range of 2 Percentage Points to 12 Percentage Points. So, polls seem to be all over the place, and some are suggesting in a close race, some are suggesting something less than close. So well be seeing probably polls with some erratic swings to them. One reason for that is that polls are being done by a variety of methodology anymore. Phones, cellphone, robocalling, internet panels, even social media platforms are being tasked for insight into Public Opinion in president ial elects. There is no single Gold Standard for polling any longer. That Gold Standard used to be random digit dialing telephone calls with a live operator but the Response Rates to those calls, to those random digital dialing telephone calls, Response Rates are dropping have dropped into the Single Digits so makes is very difficult and very expensive for pollsters to use the method and try to get a good crosssample of opinion. So people in the polling business are looking intensively for the next Gold Standard if you will, the next approach to polling that is going to be reasonably accurate and reliable and not terribly expensive to do. Thats a difficult combination and pollsters have been looking at this for a number of years the first internet based polling was done in 1999, so we are still in this period of a good deal of experimentation and churn among pollsters trying to find the next best standard. Its also important to keep inman that polls are not always wrong. They are done by people who are professionals and have a strong stake for the most part in their outcome and being accurate and reliable, and offering the public a good idea, a reasonably accurate clue what is going on in the race. But polls have been wrong often enough as we have seen in this very small sample tonight, polls haveline wrong often enough and have a checkered record so its advisible and its note a bad idea to treat them warily to be a little bit skeptical about polls and the polling numbers. And polls like the one i just referred to showing a race between biden and trump ranging from 2 Percentage Points to 12 personal opinions is evidence to treat women if the skepticism and wariness specialty is far out. The closer we get to election the better and more accurate the polls can be expected to be and we dont wh