Mellman: Updating the GOP primary and holiday shopping

Today I’m going to quickly update two previous columns.

The first, published nearly a year ago, argued “Iowa and New Hampshire…will be critically important in sorting out the winner (of the GOP nomination).”   

I noted that “Questioning the influence of these early states…has become commonplace, with the winners in Iowa and in New Hampshire each going on to capture their party’s nomination only about half the time.”

However, I wrote, “this analysis misses the tremendous joint power of these two early states. The simple fact is, since 1976, when proliferating primaries and caucuses became the chief mechanism for selecting convention delegates, every nominee but two, in both parties, won either Iowa or New Hampshire.” (The exceptions were, well, exceptional.)

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley understood this dynamic. DeSantis put all his chips on Iowa, while Haley bet big on New Hampshire. Both lost their wagers. 

Neither got what George H. W. Bush labeled the “big mo’,” a rush of support derived from the two V’s: visibility and viability, both of which attract campaign cash. Had she won New Hampshire, Haley might have gotten the boost she needed to win South Carolina and upend the race. 

As it is, she will likely lose there and certainly beyond.

The column’s central point — the 2024 Republican nominee was almost certain to win Iowa or New Hampshire. Turns out Trump won both.

In December, I examined the radically different projections emanating from two poll questions asking people to predict their holiday spending.

One, from Gallup, projected a great season for retailers, with record high consumer spending. The other, by Monmouth, foresaw cutbacks in holiday outlays.

Now that we have actual data, we can assess who was right and briefly consider why we care. 

According to Mastercard’s SpendingPulse, which measures retail sales across all forms of payment, holiday spending grew 3.1 percent in 2023 over 2022. Gallup’s poll question projected a nearly 12.5 percent increase, four times larger than the actual growth. 

They weren’t alone. A Deloitte survey celebrated what they thought would be a 14 percent increase in spending. 

One cannot calculate a precise number from the Monmouth data, but spending certainly did not decline as their question seemed to project. Monmouth had company. Another survey predicted a 26 percent decline in holiday spending, while the Conference Board poll expected a 2 percent drop.

Now you’re probably saying, “This is pretty boring stuff. Why is Mellman, who does politics, even writing about this, let alone twice?”

The answer is simple: It’s important for pollsters, and for poll consumers, to be cognizant of the limitations of our science and craft.

My examination of these shopping data in December again revealed that seemingly minor differences in question wording can lead to major differences in responses. That’s no less true in questions about politics.

Interpreting poll results requires strict fealty to the parameters of the questions’ wording. 

Trying to measure complex concepts with one or two questions is often folly.

Equally, if not more important, is recognizing the limitations of respondents. People aren’t very good at predicting their future behavior. 

Sitting on their phones in October, people can’t predict with precision how much they are going to spend between then and Christmas. 

It’s not the poll’s fault. It’s the limitations of human beings. 

Some people draw up careful budgets and stick to them. Some people draw up careful budgets and ignore them. Still others don’t quite remember what they budgeted. Some don’t budget at all.  

And many don’t know they are going to come across that perfect, if more expensive than anticipated, gift a few weeks after the pollster inquired. 

Politics often supplies heavier anchors than household budgets (see discussions of partisanship). But given these limitations, it’s a wonder election polls are as accurate as they are. 

Mellman is president of The Mellman Group and has helped elect 30 U.S. senators, 12 governors and dozens of House members. Mellman served as pollster to Senate Democratic leaders for over 20 years, as president of the American Association of Political Consultants, a member of the Association’s Hall of Fame, and is president of Democratic Majority for Israel.