HOME / the chat room: Real-time discussions with Slate writers.

Poll PositionsJeff Greenfield takes readers' questions on the New Hampshire screw-up and how the media cover the primaries.

Posted Friday, Jan. 11, 2008, at 2:19 PM ET

Slate contributor Jeff Greenfield, CBS News' senior political correspondent, was online at Washingtonpost.com on Jan. 10 to discuss the media's New Hampshire polling screw-up, speculation of the presidential race, and other complexities of the primary races.

(Continued from page 2)

RSS

Jeff Greenfield: Dave Broder of the Post, the unofficial president pro tempore of the press corps, does just such a column every year.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Do you think there may be an effect on polling where respondants are intentionally not telling the truth to pollsters? It seems to me if respondents lie, the polls could be way off. How do pollsters adjust for this potential error? Also, have voters had enough of all the media/polls that they give misleading responses ?

Jeff Greenfield: People love to speculate about this—I think what is far more in evidence is how many people refuse to talk to pollsters—if for no other reason than that they don't want to be interrupted at home by anyone. There's some reason to think that the 2004 Election Day polls were wrong because Democratic voters were more willing to talk to the canvassers than Republican voters.

_______________________

Philadelphia: Mr. Greenfield: Many thanks for taking our questions! John Kerry is endorsing Obama (according to this morning's reports). What are your thoughts on how this impacts the campaign? In particular, Hillary has been seen as the candidate with the most support from the Democratic base. Doesn't this start to chip away against that assertion? And lastly, do you think Al Gore will endorse someone before Tsunami Tuesday? If so, will it carry any weight?

Jeff Greenfield: I think there are relatively few endorsements of this sort that matter. (And please—"impacts" should not be a verb! That's the son of an English teacher channeling his mother.) An endorsement matters, I think, when it's a surprise: crossing party lines, for example, or someone highly visible and trusted who's never backed a candidate before. (Oprah? Maybe.)

_______________________

Cartoon Network: Do you know whether the Obama camp is aware that their new "Yes We Can" theme is identical to Bob the Builder's?

washingtonpost.com: Bob the Builder theme song (YouTube)

Jeff Greenfield: I don't know. Let's see if Clinton or Thompson or somebody starts using "I love you, you love me..."

_______________________

A kingdom far, far away: How much diplomatic capital did Bill Clinton spend when he used the phrase "fairy tale" to describe his rival's movement? Was it a shrewd investment?

Jeff Greenfield: This is an intriguing question—that was an unscripted, very angry answer to a question by Bill Clinton. I don't have any idea whether this will be seen as an indignant husband defending his wife, or as someone who is angry at anyone threatening "succession."

_______________________

Washington: Jeff—do you think the press and the debate formats we're using really tell us anything about candidate's positions? I'd like to hear of Hillary, McCain or Obama can give me a thumbnail of the last 50 years of Iranian history. I'd like to know whether they understand how pharmaceuticals are financed and produced. I'd like to know if they know the price of milk and gas. I'd like to know their in-depth limitations as well as their broad pronouncements. I don't see them being pushed ... thoughts?

Jeff Greenfield: I want debates where candidates have time to answer questions ... something much easier when the field is narrowed. I think the Jim Lehrer-candidates-at-a-table format, with no strict time limits, works pretty well. You may know that Barry Goldwater always said he and JFK had an understanding that if they ran in '64, they'd hold a series of debates, in different cities, on single topics. If I ran a debate, I'd have at east one math question ("a train leaves New York going West at 80 miles an hour; another train...") I'd also want to know how they feel about the designated-hitter rule—federalism, or a single national standard?

_______________________

Iowa City, Iowa: If the exit polls were so wrong about who would win in New Hampshire, doesn't it call into question all of the other information from those polls, such as which candidates women voted for, etc.?

Jeff Greenfield: You raise an intriguing question ... pollsters tell me the attitudinal stuff is more reliable than the vote stuff—but I don't know nearly enough to be able to tell you why.

_______________________

Bowie, Md.: The predictions ... do they matter to anyone except the media? Do they accomplish anything at all?

Jeff Greenfield: I started to write a semi-defense of them—and realized I couldn't. I think the New Hampshire case was unusual in that nobody—including the Clinton campaign—was saying anything other than a comfortable Obama victory. No one was waving anyone off. But you know what? That doesn't matter.

_______________________

Helena, Mont.: Boy, am I in wrong demographic. I am middle class, college educated, democrat, and I never talk to pollsters. I tell them we have a secret ballot for a reason. I just wish no one would talk to pollsters and would keep their vote secret. That's the American way!