Discussions
Are Political Polls Accurate (Honest & Ethical) /or Disservice to the Democratic Process
Posted by TheLogisitician • 11/02/08 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: political polls, Presidential Election
Do you think that the political polls are accurate (honest and ethical) and reflect the true views of the American voting public, or do they do a disservice to democracy in America?
User Comments
-
I think that they are relatively accurate considering the way they are conducted. -
Polling data is merely a tool that should be viewed in the right context, and with a critical eye. The voting public is just the sum of all voting individuals, and individual views are highly dynamic. Therefore, it can be very hard to get useful information out of polls.
As for being a disservice to democracy, I would say definitely not. Under a democracy, supreme power is held by the people. Democracy in America is limited to begin with, but polls do not limit it further. Polls don't force us to do anything -- they are simply data that exists.-
I agree with you that polls do not force us to do anything. It is just additional info. Do you think that some might be misled or interpret the info to their disadvantage? What if we had books in the library, or info on the internet, that was untrue? Is all info good, no matter the source and purpose of the polling organization?
-
"What if we had books in the library, or info on the internet, that was untrue?"
We are constantly inundated with both accurate and inaccurate info - in books, on TV, and in conversations with people. I wouldn't say that all info is good, but I would say that restricting the info that is allowed, legally or otherwise, would be bad.
If polls can teach people to look at things critically, then I think that's good.
-
-
When different political polls present different figures on the very same subject I begin to question accuracy.-
And with good reason. They obviously have different respondents, in different parts of the country, from different walks of life, and the questions are also different. Consequently, the results should vary.
Do anyone trust the polls used on Fox News, as opposed to CNN, as opposed to MSNBC? -
The point in making a poll is to get some understanding of the views of the general public. The questions have to be carefully selected to make sure that the answers will draw a more or less realistic picture of what people think.
The polls will obviously not have the same respondents, but there are rules and statistical methods that do not differ. But even it the methods differ, I think it is natural to expect, that their results will not. At least not considerably. What is the sense in listening to poll results if we expect them to be different by design?
-
-
I don't really put too much faith in them. I check them out but I think people can change their mind all the time. When they go in the box they can vote for anyone.-
I imagine that one question which can be asked is what purpose do they serve for the average citizen. They obviously serve a function for the candidates themselves and their campaign handlers. But why should the average citizen care? Doesn't a bad poll have the same potential to discourage a voter as the early reporting of election results?
-
-
Earlier today, I was watching C-Span2 Book TV, as former Gallup Senior Editor, David Moore, discussed the flaws in our polling system. Moore, now a Senior Fellow at the University of New Hampshire Survey Center, has written a new book, The Opinion Makers: an Insider Exposes the Truth behind the Polls. The bottom line: As currently structured and implemented, the polling process does a disservice to the democratic process.
According to Moore, in today’s political environment, polling organizations manipulate us through the manner in which the sample group is selected or defined, and the phrasing of the questions posed. Instead of forcing the respondents to (1) come up with an opinion, (2) state that they do not currently have an opinion, or (3) state that they are totally disengaged and do not anticipate having an opinion, polling organizations dictate the resultant “opinion.”
Moore was careful to note that both Republican and Democratic administrations have been equally guilty of misusing polls to their advantage.
The good news is that Moore believes that we can structure polls to actually serve a useful and honest function, and truly determine the pulse of democracy. Some bi-partisan organization needs to take the lead in that regard. -
in india , polls proved to be incorrect in past.-
When you say incorrect, I assume you mean that pre-election indications were that one person would win, and that person did not actually win. Alot would depend on the reason for the variance. Wrong people contacted. Wrong question asked. Sample not large enough. I imagine that there are lots of ways to affect its accuracy.
-
sample can never be large enough , so polls can not be accurate because each individual is different and based on opinions of few one can not give prediction on others opinion.
-
-
Right now, most of the polls have Obama winning on Tuesday. Does anyone feel that the actual result will be otherwise?
-
I think it will be very close - and I hope so because that would make it more interesting and exciting.
Of course, if I liked my party's candidate more I would probably hope for a landslide.
-
-
The raw data is honest and accurate to the question asked if the respondent gave their honest accurate answer. That said you can orchestrate any question to give you the answer you want and then spin the interpretation to give you any interpretation you want. Numbers don't lie, people do.
Here is a non poll, but just a political study in the news from yesterday. The analysis of this study says TV with sexual situations or content has a direct influence on teenage pregnancy. Of course the study got funding and was probably designed by members of the Parents Television Council. It pitted kids who watch less TV because they are more involved in school activities, are more affluent, and generally have have a higher rate of using birth control against kids who traditionally watch more TV because it is their only escape from the screwed up world they live in. This groups watches more TV because they have fewer structured activities in their schools and communities, are more likely to be raised by a single parent or other relations, have less access to the internet or other forms of entertainment in their home. Cap that off with this second group is less likely to practice birth control on top of everything else. What is the answer to this 700 kid study? The more sex filled TV you watch the more likely you are to get knocked up or get someone knocked up as a teenager.-
Bradhart: Very nice example to bring up. Some of you may have read Stephen Dubner's Freakonomics: The Hidden Side of Everything. Dubner, along with Richard Thaler, are from the University of Chicago, and are some of the leading researchers in the area of behavioral economics. That what Brad suggests can occur, also has a potentially positive side in that if we had "right minded" people in charge, we could do positive things for society, and really get to the root of problems. Is that really possible, on a practical level? Who gets to decide if the conclusions reached as a result of any study, research, or poll is accurate? Is there really a cause and effect relationship, or is there just a statistical correlation? Do most people appreciate the difference?
Nice comment Brad.
-
-
Andrew Blogs, I think that you are right on to mention the issue of the accuracy of information on the internet. It is an issue. With every advancement in communication, science, society, comes the potential to have a negative or detrimental consequence. Perhaps the best that we can do is to "educate" people and provide them with the tools to make their own decisions about what is accurate and what is not. Does anyone think that we should runs all books, publications, blogs, etc. through an accuracy checker before it is allowed to be disseminated? Would that have been of assistance to us in the presidential campaign, namely to have a bi-partisan commission clear or approve all statements of the campaigns for the candidates before issuance? Who would serve on that commission? Should the potential commission members be investigated thoroughly to ensure that they are not biased? How should society deal with inaccurate information?
-
It is not whether or not are they accurate that is the problem. Polls encourage groupthink, or going with the person who is doing best.-
You may have something there wehireu. The concept of group think is a problem in any society. Those of us in more sophisticated open societies like to think that we do not suffer from it , but it is always there. Jonathan Haidt, writing on edge.org contends, in his article about "why people vote republican" that the contends that the group is more important than individual thought. He claims that what democrats have failed to realize, and republicans have discovered, is that "politics is more like religion than shopping."
George Will claims that the problem with liberalism or progressives is that run the risk of being arrogant. He contends that conservative is pure, while liberals essentially say, "we can run your lives and figure out how best to spend your tax dollars, than you can." Interesting notions.
In an earlier blog comment, someone referred to the segment of the population to which Sarah Palin belongs, as the uneducated, provincial, and the ________ [I'll substitute "less sophisticated."] Aren't they entitled to think any way they want? should their thought process be controlled or manipulated in any way to make them more sophisticated? Who gets to decide the level of sophistication desired by those in control of the sophistication commission?
This is complicated stuff.
-
-
Mitesh, I agree, in theory, that the sample can never be large enough, at least for accuracy purposes. However, how about the costs and other practical considerations. As the sample increases, the costs increase. Who should pay for the increased costs? Should private polling organizations bear the cost in its entirety? Should polls be taxpayer subsidized? Tell me what the optimal sample size is per 1 million citizens? How do we guarantee, if that can be done, the accuracy of the polls?
-
Take it from someone that has worked on "the hill", no and yes!-
You know Margo, at first I was tempted to ask you to provide us with more detail regarding your response. However, after thinking about it for a few moments, I decided that that concise nature of your response really said it all.
-
-
nope.not in my opinion
-
this is a little off topic.. but i was so happy and shocked by ysterdays turnout.. he won by like more then double the votes.. it was so crazzyyy i was like wtf. haha i was just really happy.-
No problem, as far as I am concerned, although others may not be as tolerant. To bring it back on topic, did the polls in any way affect any of your decisions about how to vote on any level?
-
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
