The Problem with Polls

During the weeks leading up to the Presidential election 4 years ago, my wife and I were on our honeymoon, far away from any television or newspaper. It was a welcome relief from the non-stop jibber-jabber of the television talking heads, the hyper-analysis of political "experts", and the endless polling that seemed to take place after every new sentence that was uttered by either candidate. I especially did not miss the polls. What's the point of a poll anyhow? They are useful as blunt tools for measuring a general trend, but beyond that they can be inaccurate and misleading even when well intentioned, and when ill-intentioned manipulating the data to fit a preconceived result is possible. Besides, the only poll that counts is the one taken at the ballot box on election day.

It has been my suspicion that Obama supporters have been using polls to reinforce the notion that victory is a foregone conclusion for The One. Can't you see? Even the whole world wants Obama to win! Climb on board the Hope and Change Express before it leaves the station without you. You don't want to be on the wrong side of what the polls tell us is the likely outcome of this election, do you? As Getty Lee once sang, "conform or be cast out."

I found this piece over at Zombietime today that describes in great detail what I've felt to be the problem with polling.

Because it all boils down to this: Obama supporters presume that increasing Obama's perceived support will induce informational conformity in the American public. In other words, Obama supporters operate on the assumption that individual McCain supporters or undecided voters will in actuality change their minds about who to vote for if they perceive that a majority of people are supporting Obama. The imagined line of thinking is, "Gee, if so many people like this Obama guy, then my impression of him must be wrong; I trust the group's wisdom more than my own impressions."

I submit that this assumption is a catastrophic blunder. To the extent that there is any conformist behavior being exhibited by McCain supporters and undecided voters, it is much more likely to be normative conformity. In other words, people who are confronted with apparent overwhelming support for Obama may indeed announce that they too support Obama, but do so only in order to avoid ostracism or accusations of racism. Inside, however, they have not changed their minds. On November 4, they will go into that voting booth, and in total privacy and anonymity, they are free to vote for whomever they want, without fear of social condemnation for doing so. And in such a setting, normative conformity disintegrates, because there is no "norm" to conform to when your vote is anonymous.

I find it difficult to get excited about McCain; but I prefer him over Obama. At least McCain does not think I'm rich and therefore feels entitled to take an even larger share of my earnings in order to "spread the wealth around" to the people that would elect him to office, like Obama will. The only things I want from my next president are somebody who will build aircraft carriers, veto pork and play a lot of golf. By those measures, McCain scores 2 out of 3. Obama doesn't pass the sniff test, and the creep-factor is high among his supporters .

There's a Spanish saying that goes something along the lines of, "show me who your friends are and I will show you who you are." Suffice to say, I don't like the crowd that Obama rolls with. The number of hard left people and organizations that have skin in the game for him should be enough to give any rational person pause. Then again, it is obvious that the bulk of his supporers have cast all semblance of rationality aside.

With any luck, the hubris displayed by his supporters and manifested in the pre-election polling process will be enough to force the silent majority into action and spare our nation from at least four years of an Obama administration.