Connect with us

News

Cross-Tabs: July 2024 Times/Siena Poll of the Likely Electorate in Virginia

Published

on

Cross-Tabs: July 2024 Times/Siena Poll of the Likely Electorate in Virginia

How These Polls Were Conducted

Here are the key things to know about these Times/Siena polls:

• We spoke with 872 registered voters in Pennsylvania from July 9 to 11 and 661 registered voters in Virginia from July 9 to 12, 2024.

• Our polls are conducted by telephone, using live interviewers, in both English and Spanish. About 91 percent of respondents were contacted on a cellphone for this poll.

• Voters are selected from a list of registered voters. The list contains information on the demographic characteristics of every registered voter, allowing us to make sure we reach the right number of voters of each party, race and region. For these polls, we placed more than 160,000 calls to nearly 100,000 voters.

Advertisement

• To further ensure that the results reflect the entire voting population, not just those willing to take a poll, we give more weight to respondents from demographic groups that are underrepresented among survey respondents, like people without a college degree. You can see more information about the characteristics of our respondents and the weighted sample at the bottom of the page, under “Composition of the Sample.”

• The margin of sampling error among registered voters is plus or minus 3.7 percentage points in Pennsylvania and plus or minus 4.2 percentage points in Virginia. In theory, this means that the results should reflect the views of the overall population most of the time, though many other challenges create additional sources of error. When computing the difference between two values — such as a candidate’s lead in a race — the margin of error is twice as large.

If you want to read more about how and why we conduct our polls, you can see answers to frequently asked questions and submit your own questions here.

Full Methodology

Advertisement

The New York Times/Siena College poll of 872 registered voters in Pennsylvania, including 793 who completed the full survey, was conducted from July 9 to 11, 2024. The Times/Siena poll of 661 registered voters in Virginia, including 615 who completed the full survey, was conducted from July 9 to 12, 2024. The margin of sampling error in Pennsylvania is plus or minus 3.7 percentage points for registered voters and plus or minus 3.8 percentage points for the likely electorate. In Virginia, the margin of sampling error is plus or minus 4.2 percentage points for registered voters and plus or minus 4.4 percentage points for likely voters.

Among those who completed the full survey, the margin of sampling error in Pennsylvania is plus or minus 3.9 percentage points for registered voters and plus or minus four percentage points for the likely electorate; in Virginia, it is plus or minus 4.4 percentage points for registered voters and plus or minus 4.6 percentage points for the likely electorate.

Sample

The survey is a response rate-adjusted stratified sample of registered voters on the L2 voter file. The sample was selected by The New York Times in multiple steps to account for differential telephone coverage, nonresponse and significant variation in the productivity of telephone numbers by state.

The L2 voter file for each state was stratified by statehouse district, party, race, gender, marital status, household size, turnout history, age and homeownership. The proportion of registrants with a telephone number and the mean expected response rate, based on prior Times/Siena polls, were calculated for each stratum. The initial selection weight was equal to the reciprocal of a stratum’s mean telephone coverage and modeled response rate. For respondents with multiple telephone numbers on the L2 file, the number with the highest modeled response rate was selected.

Advertisement

Fielding

The samples for each state were stratified by political party, race and region and were fielded by the Siena College Research Institute, with additional field work by ReconMR, the Public Opinion Research Laboratory at the University of North Florida and the Institute of Policy and Opinion Research at Roanoke College. Interviewers asked for the person named on the voter file and ended the interview if the intended respondent was not available. Overall, 91 percent of respondents were reached on a cellular telephone.

The instrument was translated into Spanish by ReconMR. Bilingual interviewers began the interview in English and were instructed to follow the lead of the respondent in determining whether to conduct the survey in English or Spanish. Monolingual Spanish-speaking respondents who were initially contacted by English-speaking interviewers were recontacted by Spanish-speaking interviewers. Overall, 10 percent of interviews among self-reported Hispanics were conducted in Spanish, including 14 percent of weighted interviews.

An interview was determined to be complete for the purposes of inclusion in the ballot test question if the respondent did not drop out of the survey by the end of the two self-reported variables used in weighting — age and education — and answered at least one of the age, education, race or presidential election ballot test questions.

Weighting — registered voters

Advertisement

The survey was weighted by The Times using the R survey package in multiple steps.

First, the sample was adjusted for unequal probability of selection by stratum.

Second, the sample was weighted to match voter file-based parameters for the characteristics of registered voters.

The following targets were used:

• Party (party registration if available in the state, else classification based on participation in partisan primaries if available in the state, else classification based on a model of vote choice in prior Times/Siena polls) by whether the respondent’s race is modeled as white or nonwhite (L2 model)

Advertisement

• Age (Self-reported age, or voter file age if the respondent refuses) by gender (L2)

• Race or ethnicity (L2 model)

• Education (four categories of self-reported education level, weighted to match NYT-based targets derived from Times/Siena polls, census data and the L2 voter file)

• White/non-white race by college or non-college educational attainment (L2 model of race weighted to match NYT-based targets for self-reported education)

• Marital status (L2 model)

Advertisement

• Home ownership (L2 model)

• State region (NYT classifications)

• Turnout history (NYT classifications based on L2 data)

• Method of voting in the 2020 elections (NYT classifications based on L2 data)

Finally, the sample of respondents who completed all questions in the survey was weighted identically, as well as to the result for the general election horse race question (including leaners) on the full sample.

Advertisement

Weighting — likely electorate

The survey was weighted by The Times using the R survey package in multiple steps.

First, the samples were adjusted for unequal probability of selection by stratum.

Second, the first-stage weight was adjusted to account for the probability that a registrant would vote in the 2024 election, based on a model of turnout in the 2020 election.

Third, the sample was weighted to match targets for the composition of the likely electorate. The targets for the composition of the likely electorate were derived by aggregating the individual-level turnout estimates described in the previous step for registrants on the L2 voter file. The categories used in weighting were the same as those previously mentioned for registered voters.

Advertisement

Fourth, the initial likely electorate weight was adjusted to incorporate self-reported intention to vote. Four-fifths of the final probability that a registrant would vote in the 2024 election was based on their ex ante modeled turnout score and one-fifth based on their self-reported intentions, based on prior Times/Siena polls, including a penalty to account for the tendency of survey respondents to turn out at higher rates than nonrespondents. The final likely electorate weight was equal to the modeled electorate rake weight, multiplied by the final turnout probability and divided by the ex ante modeled turnout probability.

Finally, the sample of respondents who completed all questions in the survey was weighted identically, as well as to the result for the general election horse race question (including leaners) on the full sample.

The margin of error accounts for the survey’s design effect, a measure of the loss of statistical power due to survey design and weighting. The design effect for the full sample is 1.23 for registered voters and 1.29 for the likely electorate in Pennsylvania, and 1.20 for registered voters and 1.31 for the likely electorate in Virginia. The design effect for the sample of completed interviews is 1.24 for registered voters and 1.31 for the likely electorate in Pennsylvania, and 1.22 for registered voters and 1.34 for the likely electorate in Virginia.

Historically, The Times/Siena Poll’s error at the 95th percentile has been plus or minus 5.1 percentage points in surveys taken over the final three weeks before an election. Real-world error includes sources of error beyond sampling error, such as nonresponse bias, coverage error, late shifts among undecided voters and error in estimating the composition of the electorate.

Advertisement

News

A dead woman’s key fob and two grisly crime scenes: How the Utah triple-murder suspect was tracked across state lines | CNN

Published

on

A dead woman’s key fob and two grisly crime scenes: How the Utah triple-murder suspect was tracked across state lines | CNN

As investigators raced to find the person responsible for three killings in rural Wayne County, Utah, they used automated license plate readers and a victim’s own vehicle key fob to track their suspect – a man police said has no connection to the victims or the region that is known for its awe-inspiring landscapes dotted with quiet, small towns.

It would take just hours to pin down the suspect in a search that spanned multiple states in the Four Corners region of the Southwest – ending early Thursday with the arrest of 22-year-old Iowa resident Ivan Miller, who is charged with three counts of first-degree, aggravated murder, officials said.

Miller was taken into custody in Colorado, officials said –– more than 350 miles from where the bodies of three women were found at two locations in Utah.

Miller’s first court appearance is scheduled for Friday afternoon in Archuleta County, Colorado. He will be represented by a public defender, court records show.

The victims were identified as Margaret Oldroyd, 86; Linda Dewey, 65; and Natalie Graves, 34, Utah’s Department of Public Safety said.

Advertisement

Dewey and Graves, an aunt and niece who’d gone for a hike together, were found dead near a trailhead just outside the town of Torrey, Utah’s DPS said. The women’s bodies were found by their husbands who grew concerned when the pair didn’t return from their hike, Utah Highway Patrol spokesperson Lt. Cameron Roden said at a news conference Thursday.

Investigators found Oldroyd’s vehicle at the trailhead and deputies went to her home in nearby Lyman, where they discovered her body, Roden said.

After his arrest, Miller told investigators he spent a night in Oldroyd’s back shed and snuck into her house while she was out, according to an indictment filed in court Thursday. Miller “waited for her behind a door and shot her in the back of the head … while she was sitting down to watch television,” the indictment said.

Miller made efforts to clean up the scene before dragging the 86-year-old’s body to a cellar under the shed, where she was later found, the indictment read. He then stole her Buick Regal and traveled to the trailhead, investigators said. Miller told investigators “he did not like the car and wanted to find a different vehicle,” the indictment said.

At the trailhead, Miller said he saw Dewey and Graves get out of a white Subaru and shot them both, according to the indictment. Miller told investigators he stabbed one of the women in the chest multiple times because she was still moving, the document said.

Advertisement

He then admitted dragging their bodies into a ditch, where the two were discovered by their husbands, the indictment said.

Officials said Miller ditched Oldroyd’s car at the trail and drove away in the white Subaru. Miller also admitted stealing the women’s credit cards and using one to pay for gas, according to documents.

Investigators used a network of license plate scanners to track the Subaru “through southern Utah into northern Arizona and eventually into Colorado,” Roden said.

“Colorado law enforcement located the vehicle abandoned in Pagosa Springs, Colorado, and after a brief search, took the individual into custody without incident,” Utah DPS said Thursday.

One of the husbands was also able to track the car’s location using an app that monitored the vehicle’s key fob, investigators said. Just after 9 p.m. Wednesday, the key fob appeared to be in Farmington, New Mexico — about two hours southwest of where Miller would later be taken into custody, according to the indictment.

Advertisement

Miller had a handgun and a large knife in his possession at the time of his arrest, according to police in Pagosa Springs.

Miller told investigators he killed the women because he needed money, according to the indictment. “Miller confessed that it ‘had to be done’ but he did not like to do it,” the document reads.

Miller, who lived in Blakesburg, Iowa, set out on a cross-country road trip about two and a half weeks ago, his brother, who spoke with The New York Times on condition of anonymity, said.

Miller’s brother said the two stayed in contact during the trip, and Miller mentioned crashing his truck after hitting an elk, according to the Times.

The brother was concerned about how Miller was traveling around after that and offered to bring him back to Iowa, which he declined, the Times reported.

Advertisement

After his arrest, Miller told officials that he had been staying at a hotel in the area for a few days after he hit an elk with his truck, which he then sold to a tow truck company, according to the indictment.

On Thursday, shaken residents across Wayne County placed pink ribbons around trees and fences in their communities as they remembered the three women who were killed in apparently random attacks carried out by a stranger.

“We wanted to honor our friend and neighbor,” Mary Sorenson, who put up ribbons around Lyman, told CNN affiliate KSL.

The Wayne County School District announced it would be closed for the rest of the week and would “have counselors in place to support students when we are back in session next week.”

In a statement Thursday, Torrey Mayor Mickey Wright described the multiple homicides as a “heartbreaking moment for our small, close‑knit community.”

Advertisement

“Our community is strong. In the coming days, we will support one another, check on our neighbors, and ensure that those affected by this tragedy are not alone,” Wright said. “We stand together today — in grief, in compassion, and in solidarity.”

Continue Reading

News

Iran’s fight for survival / The widening war / Trump’s nebulous goals : Sources & Methods

Published

on

Iran’s fight for survival / The widening war / Trump’s nebulous goals : Sources & Methods
The U.S.-Israeli war with Iran is spilling out across the region. What are the goals? And how does it end?Host Mary Louise Kelly talks with International Correspondent Aya Batrawy, based in Dubai, and Pentagon correspondent Tom Bowman, about the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran. Six days of war have turned the middle east upside down, and it’s still not clear how the U.S. will determine when its objectives have been accomplished.Recommended Iran reading:Blackwave by Kim GhattasAll the Shah’s Men by Stephen KinzerPrisoner by Jason RezaianPersian Mirrors by Elaine SciolinoListener spy novel recommendation: Pariah by Dan FespermanEmail the show at sourcesandmethods@npr.orgNPR+ supporters hear every episode without sponsor messages and unlock access to our complete archive. Sign up at plus.npr.org.
Continue Reading

News

Map: 4.9-Magnitude Earthquake Shakes Louisiana

Published

on

Map: 4.9-Magnitude Earthquake Shakes Louisiana

Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 4 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “light,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown.  All times on the map are Central time. The New York Times

A light, 4.9-magnitude earthquake struck in Louisiana on Thursday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 5:30 a.m. Central time about 6 miles west of Edgefield, La., data from the agency shows.

U.S.G.S. data earlier reported that the magnitude was 4.4.

As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.

Advertisement

Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Central time. Shake data is as of Thursday, March 5 at 8:40 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Thursday, March 5 at 10:46 a.m. Eastern.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending