This is a warranted point, but a fraught one. Firstly, the actual number of Independents among registered voters is not half, it is just shy of 40%. But more importantly, most Independents LEAN toward one party reliably enough that they can pretty much just be lumped in with that party, for all political purposes. Actual swing voters are…
This is a warranted point, but a fraught one. Firstly, the actual number of Independents among registered voters is not half, it is just shy of 40%. But more importantly, most Independents LEAN toward one party reliably enough that they can pretty much just be lumped in with that party, for all political purposes. Actual swing voters are, especially in today's climate, maaaaaybe ~10% of voters. Furthermore, while these folks are perceived by themselves and others as having some real nifty out-of-the-box thinking skills because of their refusal of partisan loyalty, research has shown they are actually some of the least informed voters; they tend to pay attention only very close to an election, and to whoever gets their attention first.
With this in mind, it should make perfect sense that the two leading candidates of the two major parties would be polling closely this far out, no matter who those people are. The typical partisans and partisan-leaning Independents will give an automatic affirmation of their camp, while the 10% of voters the campaigns are actually chasing will continue to give a gosh-I-dunno-not-really-a-fan-of-anyone shrug until 3 months out, when they actually start even trying to learn anything. This goes double with something like Biden vs. TFG. TFG is a polarizing cult leader; his floor is high, his ceiling is low. The Biden camp is banking on a healthy margin of victory being provided by the true swings, who'll tune in after Labor Day, realize things are actually going much better than they thought, no way they want that horrid other guy back (especially if other guy is literally under House arrest), and check the box again accordingly.
Infuriating for those of us who actually TRY to keep abreast and exercise some in-depth thinking, but that's the lay of the land.
Will, reading “his floor is high, his ceiling low” I momentarily had a satisfying vision of TFG in a trash compactor. TFG makes my hackles rise, but then I remember he lost the popular vote when he was first elected, then lost it (and the Electoral College) this last time as well. I’ve been snookered before, but aside from his slavish cult members (and it is gobsmacking to listen to them speak about him), his latest actions aren’t winning him any popularity contests, so I imagine (fingers crossed!) should he be the R candidate, he’d lose by an even wider margin. I hope all the brouhaha surrounding him motivates the fence-sitters to engage & vote.
Will, also frustrated with the apparent disconnection of most poll results with the rest of the news and given the vast variety of information distribution and uptake, I have come to seriously doubt the ability of ANY organization to effectively poll the populace. How would they accomplish contact with enough different people on enough different platforms who are actually willing to respond to represent the populace in general?!
Oh, it can be done; there are decades upon decades of solid mathematics behind the methods used by reliable practicioners in the field. The thing people tend to struggle with is understanding that even the most perfectly-weighted, gold-star poll has a margin of error and confidence interval, and since things like voter attitudes towards candidates are fluid, you are aiming your dart at a moving target. If you can be 95% sure that your poll results have a margin of error of 3%, that would be considered a job well done, and useful to a campaign. Yet if you are a reader looking to know who is "ahead," and the poll says Candidate A is ahead by 3%, all that actually means is that at the very second you're reading the article Candidate A is somewhere in the range of losing by a fraction of a percent to winning handily by 6, except for the 5% chance where either a win or a loss is even bigger, and who the heck knows in three weeks?
So... always look at averages and trends, not a single poll. Ever. And preferably don't look at them much at all. Just make some phone calls for who you want to win and then go read something fun instead.
This is a warranted point, but a fraught one. Firstly, the actual number of Independents among registered voters is not half, it is just shy of 40%. But more importantly, most Independents LEAN toward one party reliably enough that they can pretty much just be lumped in with that party, for all political purposes. Actual swing voters are, especially in today's climate, maaaaaybe ~10% of voters. Furthermore, while these folks are perceived by themselves and others as having some real nifty out-of-the-box thinking skills because of their refusal of partisan loyalty, research has shown they are actually some of the least informed voters; they tend to pay attention only very close to an election, and to whoever gets their attention first.
With this in mind, it should make perfect sense that the two leading candidates of the two major parties would be polling closely this far out, no matter who those people are. The typical partisans and partisan-leaning Independents will give an automatic affirmation of their camp, while the 10% of voters the campaigns are actually chasing will continue to give a gosh-I-dunno-not-really-a-fan-of-anyone shrug until 3 months out, when they actually start even trying to learn anything. This goes double with something like Biden vs. TFG. TFG is a polarizing cult leader; his floor is high, his ceiling is low. The Biden camp is banking on a healthy margin of victory being provided by the true swings, who'll tune in after Labor Day, realize things are actually going much better than they thought, no way they want that horrid other guy back (especially if other guy is literally under House arrest), and check the box again accordingly.
Infuriating for those of us who actually TRY to keep abreast and exercise some in-depth thinking, but that's the lay of the land.
Will, reading “his floor is high, his ceiling low” I momentarily had a satisfying vision of TFG in a trash compactor. TFG makes my hackles rise, but then I remember he lost the popular vote when he was first elected, then lost it (and the Electoral College) this last time as well. I’ve been snookered before, but aside from his slavish cult members (and it is gobsmacking to listen to them speak about him), his latest actions aren’t winning him any popularity contests, so I imagine (fingers crossed!) should he be the R candidate, he’d lose by an even wider margin. I hope all the brouhaha surrounding him motivates the fence-sitters to engage & vote.
" I momentarily had a satisfying vision of TFG in a trash compactor."
Barbara, you just made my day.
Will, also frustrated with the apparent disconnection of most poll results with the rest of the news and given the vast variety of information distribution and uptake, I have come to seriously doubt the ability of ANY organization to effectively poll the populace. How would they accomplish contact with enough different people on enough different platforms who are actually willing to respond to represent the populace in general?!
Oh, it can be done; there are decades upon decades of solid mathematics behind the methods used by reliable practicioners in the field. The thing people tend to struggle with is understanding that even the most perfectly-weighted, gold-star poll has a margin of error and confidence interval, and since things like voter attitudes towards candidates are fluid, you are aiming your dart at a moving target. If you can be 95% sure that your poll results have a margin of error of 3%, that would be considered a job well done, and useful to a campaign. Yet if you are a reader looking to know who is "ahead," and the poll says Candidate A is ahead by 3%, all that actually means is that at the very second you're reading the article Candidate A is somewhere in the range of losing by a fraction of a percent to winning handily by 6, except for the 5% chance where either a win or a loss is even bigger, and who the heck knows in three weeks?
So... always look at averages and trends, not a single poll. Ever. And preferably don't look at them much at all. Just make some phone calls for who you want to win and then go read something fun instead.