Polls Could Be Wrong

[Reddie]

According to a NY Times article:

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/fir...ctions-offer-warnings-for-u-s-pollsters/?_r=0

Pre-election polls in numerous countries this year have widely missed their marks, often by underestimating support for candidates on the ideological fringes. The polling failures in countries like Britain, Poland and Israel point to technical issues that could well foreshadow polling problems in the United States, many analysts believe.

The message? We shouldn't trust polls. Though the polls might indicate that some candidates will fare better than others when the election is held we might get results we weren't expecting.

Thing though is there have been rumors circulating around the net that the 2016 elections could be rigged. Are we being prepped for that? If we are being told the polls could be wrong . . .

 

[pwarbi]

I don't think it's breaking news that polls aren't always accurate to be honest, and many times in the past what the poll says and what people actually want are entirely different and it leaves you wondering just what did happen.

Here in the UK at the last election we had a similar experience. The polls showed that Labour and the conservative parties we're too close to call a winner, none of the press or media could decide who should win, and more importantly, neither could the electorate.

Voting day came, the results were announced and the conservative party blew everybody else away and got in with a massive overall majority. But...even now, most of the media can't decide if that's a good thing and nearly everybody who did vote are still undecided as to who they should have voted for, and that doesn't add up to me.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist at all, but the exit polls showed the two parties even. The electorate thought the parties were even. The media thought the parties were even, so where did all the conservative voters come from? It's not even as though it was a close run election. In about 98% of England, the conservative party candidate won his seat. How did that that happen in an election that was supposed to be the closest we'd ever seen?

 

[dogtowner]

Polls have become progressively less accurate and I believe that to some degree it is an attempt to influence voting. To what degree I can't say.

Moral if the story is : ignore polls. Ignore words and focus on deeds. It's the best way to guage future actions.

 

[pwarbi]

Polls these days are about as reliable as the people that are asked the questions to make that poll up in the first place.

I remember a news organisation having a camera crew setup outside one of the polling stations over here and they was asking people going in, if they knew who they was voting for, and who that was. On their way out they asked them again if they voted for the party they intended to, how easy was the ballot paper to read etc.

I'd say out of 10 people, about 5 or 6 actually voted for the party they said they would going in. Asking the others why the change of heart at the last minute, and the reasons went from I couldn't find the party I wanted on the ballot paper so just voted for another one that I'd heard of (unbelievable!) To it did just didn't seem right. My grandfather and father have always voted for this particular party, I would be the only one not to and I don't think that's right so I followed in their footsteps instead of changing (also unbelievable!)

I guess that just shows how fickle and indecisive people can be.

 

[dogtowner]

Polls these days are about as reliable as the people that are asked the questions to make that poll up in the first place.

I remember a news organisation having a camera crew setup outside one of the polling stations over here and they was asking people going in, if they knew who they was voting for, and who that was. On their way out they asked them again if they voted for the party they intended to, how easy was the ballot paper to read etc.

I'd say out of 10 people, about 5 or 6 actually voted for the party they said they would going in. Asking the others why the change of heart at the last minute, and the reasons went from I couldn't find the party I wanted on the ballot paper so just voted for another one that I'd heard of (unbelievable!) To it did just didn't seem right. My grandfather and father have always voted for this particular party, I would be the only one not to and I don't think that's right so I followed in their footsteps instead of changing (also unbelievable!)

I guess that just shows how fickle and indecisive people can be.

If I responded at all I would give different answers just to mess with them

 

[Alexia]

The polls in the US are slightly different as they analyze the public vote, and not the votes of the electoral college. It will be interesting to see how many states hold, or may become swing states. The Republicans did have a resurgence , but often this switch happens when people want change, then it swings back. A lot depends on who gets the nomination.

 

[dogtowner]

The polls in the US are slightly different as they analyze the public vote, and not the votes of the electoral college. It will be interesting to see how many states hold, or may become swing states. The Republicans did have a resurgence , but often this switch happens when people want change, then it swings back. A lot depends on who gets the nomination.

Not sure I get what you're saying.
Electoral depends on a number of different things as each state decides it's rules and that is not subject to rapid change typically. However district drawing which can influence it (for those states that are winner take all which is most of them). A swing in state sentiment can favor the new direction.
This is why the left wants the EC gone.

 

[BigRob]

It is really not the case that respondents give bad answers and that is why a poll is inaccurate. Polls are often incorrect because they sample the wrong people.

For example, you can poll 1,000 voters, but if the makeup of the people who answer the poll isn't similar to what you expect to turnout on election day then the poll will be flawed from the start. We can get a good idea of what that sample will look like - but at the end of the day there is always guesswork in that sample - and sometimes they just get it wrong.

 

[pwarbi]

It is really not the case that respondents give bad answers and that is why a poll is inaccurate. Polls are often incorrect because they sample the wrong people.

For example, you can poll 1,000 voters, but if the makeup of the people who answer the poll isn't similar to what you expect to turnout on election day then the poll will be flawed from the start. We can get a good idea of what that sample will look like - but at the end of the day there is always guesswork in that sample - and sometimes they just get it wrong.

The polls in the UK elections was actually taken ON election day as the people was going in to vote and then coming out, so while I do take your point that a lot of polls do ask the wrong questions to the wrong people, in this occasion everything should have been in place to have at least got an inclination as to what the verdict was going to be.

Unless people did just lie for no reason?

 

[BigRob]

The polls in the UK elections was actually taken ON election day as the people was going in to vote and then coming out, so while I do take your point that a lot of polls do ask the wrong questions to the wrong people, in this occasion everything should have been in place to have at least got an inclination as to what the verdict was going to be.

Unless people did just lie for no reason?

It doesn't really matter when it was taken - it doesn't mean they got the sample correct. For example, if you want to get a feel for how the electorate as a whole feels and you poll 1,000 white, male voters on election day - your sample is flawed from the start.

You have to account for what the turnout actually is. It is X% male, X% female, X% white, X% black, X% hispanic etc etc.

Just polling "voters" doesn't mean you have a good sample - because subsets of voters have very different opinions and you have to account for that in your sample to get an accurate read. Good pollsters do this - bad ones do not.

 

[pwarbi]

Is that not looking to deep in to things tho? Ask one person who they're going to vote for before they vote, then ask the same person again who they actually did voted for on the way out, and to get a totally different answer is a little strange don't you think?

People change their minds and have last minute doubts, but for THAT many to switch I'm a matter of minutes is a bit odd don't you think?