Sarah Palin Leads in 2012 But in a Very Poorly Conducted Poll

12/1/2009, by Proloy Bhatta

HIGHLIGHTS

• Palin 17%, Huckabee 10%, Romney 9%.
• Ron Paul 1%, Jindal 1%, Pawlenty 1%.
• Other + No one + Wouldn't Vote + Unsure = 50%.

Washington Post has Palin leading the 2012 primary in a poll of Republicans and Republican-leaners -- conducted Nov 19-23.

Palin beats Huckabee and Romney by 7% and 8% respectively. But this was a poorly conducted poll. In fact, I would never include this poll in any poll of poll averages.

Unlike other 2012 polls, this poll did not run off a list of names. In some ways that is cool because it includes names that would not otherwise be included by the pollster. For example, Ron Paul and Bobby Jindal each received 1%. They rarely include Jindal in the 2012 polls due to his botched GOP response to Obama in February. And they have yet to include Ron Paul in a 2012 poll to date.

But what destroys the credibility of the poll in my eyes is the fact that John McCain garners 7%.

When names are not given in a laundry list fashion, the resondents are forced to think of a candidate off the top of their heads. They remember McCain because he ran in 2008 and they remember Sarah Palin because she is all over the news.

I am not trying to bash Palin with this analysis. I am just simply stating how Palin was able to lead a field that includes Huckabee and Romney with only 17% of the vote.

Furthermore, the total sum of "other", "no one", and "unsure" is 48% -- the sum was 16% when CNN conducted their poll in mid-October. Jarring their memory, many of those 48% would have chosen Romney or Huckabee if the names were given to them. Yes, Palin's support would have grown too from that group.

This does not prove Palin is behind. But, to me, it does not prove she is ahead either. It proves that more folks are able to come up with Palin's name off the top of their heads than Romney or Huckabee.

Pollsters try their best to limit the "other" in their polls to obtain accurate results. If you include the "wouldn't vote" option, this Washington Post poll has 50% of respondents in a quandary. Finally, by adding the 7% voting for McCain -- 57% of respondents are not choosing a legitimate potential candidate.

Theoretically, a second question would have been appropriate to ask this 57% whether they would specifically support Palin, Huckabee, or Romney -- showing a true leader among the top tier of potential candidates. But that was not done.

To compare, observe the results of the Washington Post poll with the CNN poll from mid-October.

CNN has the race tightened up among four candidates: Huckabee, Palin, Romney, and Pawlenty -- something that this Washington Post poll did not do.

Although I doubt this poll will garner much weight among analysts, it will be touted by the media because any story about Palin brings ratings. If I were a conspiracy theory nut, I would say Washington Post deliberately polled in such a poor fashion so that they could arbitrarily show Palin was in the lead.

Here is the link to the poll.