politics

The way in which most polls are conducted is often biased towards older voters as they're often phone calls. How many young people are answering phonecalls from unknown numbers? Also the sources pollsters get their numbers from are also often biased as well.

Here's a report from Pew Research who make their money from polls, so this is the rosiest of takes on it https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/09/21/does-public-opinion-polling-about-issues-still-work/

Here's a take from the Times and what they're trying to do about it. I've pasted the archive.is link https://archive.is/sQ5Vi

And here's a report from journalists that doesn't profit from polling https://theweek.com/politics/2024-election-polls-accuracy

Well said.

It's also worth remembering that literally any poll conducted is only displaying data based on people who voluntarily respond to polls.

Even when Biden was still running, the results were always going to be flawed based on the simple fact that far more Trump voters are the sort of rabid, loud people with nothing better to do than to let someone know what they think about politics, vs Biden voters who were motivated in large part by nothing more significant than "I just don't want trump".

The first person is going to be happy to spend 15 minutes on the phone with anyone willing to listen to their political thoughts. The second person is hanging up.

Can we agree on these bullet-points? If so I'll adjust and use going forward.

• Individual polls from reputable pollsters can be a barometer for a snapshot in time, but they may also be outliers.
• An aggregation of many reputable polls during the same period of time is a more accurate snapshot in time.
• Long-term trends can be very useful and give more extrapolative trajectories (e.g., the long-term downward decline of Biden's aggregate national approval ratings and his steady decline in swing-states leading to a change in strategy and his stepping down).
• Still, such polls may not accurately represent fringe groups (though many pollsters compensate in a variety of ways).
• We shouldn't just blindly follow the polls (blind-leading-the-blind mentality)—e.g., if the case is never made for something, then it never gets popular. Bernie Sanders heavily advocated for Universal Healthcare and we of course have seen an adjustment in polling instead of simply reacting to its initial unpopularity—but we also shouldn't ignore trends.
• Polls don't dictate what people do in the moment, or say or do later; instead, they're a reflection of where they are at in the moment.
• Every advocate should have the mindset of trying to change polls to their advantage; this by active campaigning (canvassing, phone-banking, fundraising, etc.), change of messaging, etc.
• Context should always be considered when discussing polling. (e.g., in isolation, Biden's debate could be considered, "just one bad night, and we can swing polls back," without considering the long-term concern that was already present over his immutable vice — age/cognitive-decline.)
• No matter what the polls say, winning, tying, or losing... Always and I mean always Register and VOTE. Not just this, but drag 3-5 other people to register and vote with you.

They're registering Democrat and polling Democrat, so there are nice, cushy feelings when it comes time to vote. We don't need to vote; she's got this in the bag. They're getting on the lists to be called, I wouldn't be shocked if the polling organizations here infiltrated.

Clinton's polls looked fine until Trump won by a significant margin. That was no happenstance. Maybe she's polling well, maybe it's Maybelline, doesn't matter one bit. Expect there's foul play and make sure as hell you vote.