A Case Study in Establishing an In-House Polling Operation for a South Dakota Political Campaign
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
South Dakota State University Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange Electronic Theses and Dissertations 1983 A Case Study in Establishing an In-House Polling Operation for a South Dakota Political Campaign Jeff Brockelsby Follow this and additional works at: https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/etd Recommended Citation Brockelsby, Jeff, "A Case Study in Establishing an In-House Polling Operation for a South Dakota Political Campaign" (1983). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 4323. https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/etd/4323 This Thesis - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. I DATE DUE M�'< \ 5 •ro FE 17 l� UPI201-�509 PRINTED IN USA A CA SE STUDY IN ESTABL ISHING AN IN-HOUSE POLLING OPERATION FOR A SOUTH DA KOTA POL ITICAL CAMPA IGN BY JEFF BROCKELSBY A thesis submitted in partial fulfil lment of the requ irements for the degr ee Master of Science Major in Journalism South Da kota State University 1983 A CASE STUDY IN ESTABL ISHING AN IN-HOUSE POLL ING OPERATION FOR A SOUTH DA KOTA POLIT ICAL CAMPA IGN This thesis is approved as a creditable and independent investigation by a candida te for the degree, Master of Science, and is acceptable for meeting the thesis requ irements for this degree. Acceptance of this thesis does not imply that the conclusions reached by the candidate are necessarily the conclusions of the najor depart- ment. Dr . Richard W. Lee -Da--!e - Thesis Adviser Dr . Ricnard w. Lee ua�e Head, Journalism and MassCo mmunication ii . TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Pa ge I. INTRODUCTION • • • 0 • 0 • . 0 • . • 1 Ilo PERSPECTIVE • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 7 Importance of Polling ••••••••••••• o • • 7 History of Pol itical Polling • • • • • • • • • • • • • 9 Pr ofess iona l Pollsters and Poll ing Firms •• o • • • • 12 In-House Poll ing • • • • • • o • • • • • • • • • o o • 15 IIIo USE AND MISUSE OF POLITICAL POLLS • � 0 • • • • • • • 22 Useful Information From Polls • • • • o • 22 Limitations of Polls and £.211. Data •• o • • • • • • • 28 IV o METHODOLOGY ••••••.• ••••0 • 0 • 0 0 ••••• 40 Selection of Basic Survey Technique • o • • • • • • • 40 Selection of Sampling Technique • • • o • • • • • • 46 Stratification and Draw ing of Sample • • • • • • • • • 49 Questionna ire Construction: Genera l Guidelines • • 54 Qu estionna ire Construction: Section � Section Breakdown • • • • • • • • • • • • • • o • • • • • • 55 Interviewing • • • • • • • • • • • • • • o • • • • • • 63 Coding • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • o • • • • • • 66 Tabulations • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 67 � Analys is ••••••••••••• o • • • • • • 67 v. FINDINGS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • 0 73 Cost • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 73 Response � • • • • • • • • • • • • • o o • • • • 75 Survey Results • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 79 VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . 0 • • • 0 0 91 Summary of Paper . • • • • 0 • 0 • . 91 Strengths • • • . • • • • 0 0 • • • • 92 Weaknesses • • • . • • • • 0 • • • . 94 Improvements • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 • . 96 Conclusions • • • • • o • • • • 0 0 . 99 Recommendations for Further Study • • o • . • • 0 0 100 iii Chapter Page APPENDIX A Classif ication Schemes of Ways Poll Information Can Be Used Pol itically o •••••••• o • • • • • • • • 103 APPENDIX B Strata • 0 0 • • • 0 • 0 • • • • • • • 0 • • • • • • • 0 • • 107 APPENDIX C Questionnaire • • • • • • • • • • 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • • 115 APPENDIX D Matrices for Selecting Respondent • o • • • • • o • • • • • • 122 APPRNDIX E Instructions for Interviewers • • • • • • o o • • o • • • • • 124 APPENDIX F Possible Answers to Reasons for Refusal • • • • • • • • • • • 128 APPENDIX G What the Respondent Might Like to Know • o • • o • • o o • • 129 APPENDIX H Da ily Interviewing Record •••• • o ••• o • • • • • • • • 130 APPENDIX I An Ana lysis of Politica l Attitudes in South Da kota • • • • • 132 Selected Bibliography • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 146 iv LIST OF TABLES 1. FINAL DISPOSITION OF CALLS •••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 76 2. FINAL DISPOSITION OF CALLS FOR CRAFT'S MISS ISS IPP I OPIN ION POLL • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••77 3. QUESTION ONE: REGISTERED TO VOTE IN SOUTH DA KOTA . • • •••79 4 . QUESTION TWO : PLAN TO VOTE IN GENERAL ELECTION • • • • • • • 80 5. QUESTION THREE: PREFERRED GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATE • . • • • 80 6 . QUESTION FOUR: PREFERRED CONGRESS IONAL CANDIDATE • • . 81 7. QUESTION FIVE: RATING OF JA NKLOW AS GOVERNOR • • • • • • • • 82 8. QUEST ION SIX: JA NKLOW 'S MOST LIKED QUALITIES . • . 83 9. QUESTION SEVEN: JA NKLOW 'S MOST DISLIKED QUAL ITIES ••• • • • 83 10. QUESTIONS EIGHT AND NINE: MOST IMPORTANT AND SECOND MOST IMPORTANT PROBLEMS FACING SOUTH DA KOTA • • • • • • ••8 4 11. QUESTION TEN: STATE GOVERNMENT SHOULD DO MORE TO HELP FARMERS • • • • • • • • o • • • • • • • • • 85 12. QUESTION ELEVEN: JA NKLOW 'S ARGU ING HARMING STATE • • • • • • 86 13. QUEST ION TWELVE : CONCERN ABOUT JANKLOW MAKING SECRET DEALS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 86 14 . QUESTION THIRTEEN: BOTHERED BY JA NKLOW'S METHODS • • • • • • 87 15. QUESTION FOURTEEN: CHIEF SOURCE OF INFORMATION ON SOUTH DA KOTA POL IT ICS ••••••••••••••••••87 16 . QUESTIONS FIFTEEN THROUGH EIGHTEEN; ITEMS NINETEEN AND TWENTY: DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMAT ION • • • • • • • • • • • • 88 v AC KNO\ILEDGMENTS The author wishes to express his apprecia tion to: Dr . Richard Lee, Department Head and Thesis Adviser , for his guidance, advice, time and patience. Dr. Robert Dimit and Mr. fveynard Samuelson, for serving on my thesis con�ittee. My family , for their love , financia l support and emotiona l sup port. Jan and J. J. Bertholf, Ja n Vrchota and M:lrk Goodman, for their friendship. Rev . Joe Colaw and the College and Career Fellowship, for their encouragement and prayers. Trixie Bortnenl, for her assistance and the generous use of her typewriter . Betty Prunty, for her advice and many hours of typing and pr oof reading. Robin Bortnem, for assistance in typing. Warren Hovland of the SDSU Computer Center , for his assistance in tabulating survey questionnaires . Roz Graves and Orie Rentschler of Northwestern Bell Telephone Company, Harlan Best of the South Da kota Public Utilities Commission staff and John Y. Devereaux of Rep. Tom Da schle's staff, for providing much important information. George v. Cunningham, to whom I am indebted for whatever meager skills in political ana lysis I was able to bring to bear on this thesis. vi Dennis Me idinger, Ruth Stowsand, Mi chelle Kayl, Mary Lou Collins, Berneice May er , Lynn Collins , Dick Ha islet, Dee Carlson , Dorothy Flyger , Jim Kroll, Wayne Stowsand , Sue 0., Rose Bechtold and Evelyn Griesse, O'Connor campa ign volunteers, for the ma ny hours they spent on the telephone interviewing survey respondents. Randy Jvea s and Jvery Berry, O'Connor campa ign staf fers, for their assistance in interviewing. Tom Unzicker and M. J. O'Connor , for their assistance in many phases of the project and their strong support of it. Mike O'Connor, for generously agreeing to spend precious campa ign funds to spons or this project. To him, I am deeply indebted and especially grateful. JLB vii DEDICA T ION This thesis is dedicated to the Lord , through Whom it was possible viii 1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Evaluating wha t voters are thinking and deciding how best to com municate with them are critical to a pol itical candidate planning a campa ign strategy. Until recently, a candidate relied on his own in stincts and those of his advisers to evaluate what people thought about a particular issue or person and to determine the most effective way of presenting campa ign messages. Political poll ing has changed this. Political s cientist Paul Va n Riper said in Handbook .£f. Practical Politics "the r.a pidly increas ing utilization of soc ia l science techniques to help deterrrtine political strategy is one of the most important of the recent trends in American pol itics."1 As a result, modern-day candida tes are relying on polling more and moree� However, as the popularity of political polling has in creased, so has its cost. Sophisticated opin ion research is often too expensive for cand ida tes with limited budgets. One way a campa ign with a small budget can get around this pr oblem is to do its own polling. But such a venture can be risky because set ting up a polling operation is difficult, and if not done pr operly, the poll will not yield accurate data . This thesis addresses this problem directly. It establishes a methodology for a statewide, in-house poll that can pr oduce reliable, strategic data for a South Da kota political campa ign. 2 The methodology for this thesis wa s ta ilored to an actual cam pa ign, tha t of the 1982 South Dakota Democra tic gubernatorial candidate, Micha el J. O'Connor , whose opponent wa s the incunilient Republ.ican governor , William Jankl ow . The methodology outlined herein would be spec ifically applicable to any sta tewide campa ign in South Dakota and generally applicable to campa igns in other rural states . Furthermore, many aspects of the methodology could be applied to other kinds of surveys . The development of this methodology