The Polling Project: Scrutinize The Polling Industry

OfftheBus:

"The impact of polls and polling on our political process continues to be one of the unexplored stories of the 2008 race, largely ignored by traditional media outlets that have grown too accustomed to the ease of offering up the latest "who's leading the horserace?" story. So HuffPost's OffTheBus has decided to launch "The Polling Project, " a wide-ranging effort to scrutinize an industry devoted to scrutinizing us.

Our aim is simple: to get a better understanding of how polling is being used across the country. We want to get to the bottom of how pollsters conduct their surveys, how they gather and build their stats, how they target who they contact, and, ultimately, how they reach their conclusions ? conclusions that often fuel the very races they are supposed to be analyzing.

Read the whole story: OfftheBus

Comments

[GreedyOldPsychopaths]

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." Attributed to Mark Twain.

[Zhonni]

I am glad somebody is starting to pay attention. I watch the averages, like I would watch the market, on Real Foggy Politics dot com.

I said real foggy because there is a lot of B.S. in it. I actually dedicated 1hr or 2 to did up this facts.

These are the post that have boiyonged Hillary over Guiliani.

Fox News 11/13 - 11/14 900 RV 43 47 4 Clinton +4.0

Cook/RT Strategies 11/08 - 11/11 855 RV 43 46 9 Clinton +3.0

NBC/WSJ 11/01 - 11/05 1509 A 45 46 4 Clinton +1.0

CNN 11/02 - 11/04 929 RV 45 51 4 Clinton +6.0

USA Today/Gallup 11/02 - 11/04 938 RV 45 51 1 Clinton +6.0

ABC/Wash Post 10/29 - 11/01 1131 A 46 50 1 Clinton +4.0

Marist 10/29 - 11/01 1102 A 40 50 10 Clinton +10.0

Democracy Corps (D) 10/21 - 10/23 994 LV 45 49 3 Clinton +4.0

Pew Research 10/17 - 10/23 1607 RV 43 51 6 Clinton +8.0

Cook/RT Strategies 10/18 - 10/21 855 RV 39 43 11 Clinton +4.0

CNN 10/12 - 10/14 927 RV 47 49 1 Clinton +2.0

FOX News 10/09 - 10/10 900 RV 43 47 10 Clinton +4.0

The above polls were added to Hillaries averages without being added to Edwards or Obama. Edwards has not had any polls added to his averages since the November and it is making him look bad with Guiliani up .2 against him.

Anyways sorry for the long post I have more but I will stop here.

[sammy333]

Don't forget to scrutinize the election vote counting industry as well! I am still curious how Joe-the-bloody-war-monger-Lieberman got elected.

[dawlishgal]

THANK YOU. If there is a way to log into the daily give and take of this project, I would like to be told how to do it.

This kind of scrutiny has long been necessary. I worked in the polling biz, admittedly in advertising research, but at least there people tried to follow something like a science in formulating questions, getting random samples, and data-analysis.

What finally drove me out of the biz was the realization that the account execs didn't want to know the TRUTH and neither did the creative personnel. What they wanted was for the research department to validate decisions that they had already made BEFORE we did the research.

I learned one big thing at that job that has served me well in other jobs: that one doesn't know the meaning of a question until one hears the answers. The idea that anybody can sit down and cook up a questionnaire, and that the resulting answers will be a little slice of reality is one of the big delusions of the social sciences.

I have always questioned those polls who report their results in terms of BEHAVIOR instead of words....ie. they ought to be saying (eg) "Fifty percent of those polled SAID THAT THEY support Joe Blow." (Rather than "Fifty percent support Joe Blow"). Sometimes this distinction doesn't matter, but we don't usually know if it matters or not, so we might as well tell the truth...polls do not measure behavior or actual beliefs, just people's verbal reports of their behaviors and beliefs. ANd it is the job of the pollster to formulate questions that at least approach the truth about the BEHAVIOR.

Years ago, almost every big newspaper had its own polling division, not just in big election years, but on staff year round.

Now, the political parties have destroyed the meaning of the word "poll" by sending bogus slanted polls that serve as nothing but pleas for donations.

[Bobleblah1]

Oh so now you want to examine polling?
I wonder what brought this on?
Could it be the fact that polls show Obama ahead of Hillary?

Oh no! theres a poll that says your master isnt winning. "I think we should start examining these polls"
Take this bullshit, Hillary planted blurb and shove it up your ass.

[wmbear]

POLL THE POLLSTERS!...

Yes!....

[longislandlol]

What the innovative Huff Post Polling Project could also prove is that people should not be influenced or easily swayed by these polls; perhaps more Independent voters will result from this excellent Project...

[robertlockwoodmills]

I took a poll recently in which I asked the following question: "Do you trust polls?"

68% answered NO

17% answered YES

15% didn't understand the question

[nellre]

The same question is asked every couple of months, but to a different sample of people. The analysis gives the result a margin of error of 3.5% each time, yet the results range far wide of that margin of error... it's time to examine the methods.
It's in your face that something is wrong. The pollsters have a responsibility to publish their best efforts. It's not much different than a scientist publishing results of her study.

[Kungfublood]

I've been polled years ago and more recently I have been push poled:
What is wrong with education in California schools? is it the teachers fault or not enough money for education? well my answer is neither , my answer is far to much money has been given to administrators in order to keep up there new overpriced cars how can you expect an education when the principle of the local elementary school is making as much as the President of the United States was making when i was in school? but I push back "you should be ashamed of your self asking questions in this prejudiced manner ,what would your ancestors say if they could hear you working against your own best interest and the future of your own children!

[grahamhgreen]

Much of poll manipulation is done by what data is reported and repeated, as well as what questions are asked and the framing of those questions.

I hope you can include these points, ans well.

[Trilby]

I have never been polled but that is not surprising. So-called national polls routinely involve only 900-1200 people. That is a ridiculously small number, I don't care how rigorously they think they are adjusting for whatever. This is a nation of 50 states with people of extremely diverse populations and views. If you hit 20 people in each state, TWENTY PEOPLE PER STATE, you think you are going to get an accurate picture of anything? It is insanity, and goes a long way toward explaining why poll "results" in recent years have been mind-bogglingly STUPID!