I'm going to beg, ok?

[PCIntern]

I swear, I am open to anyone having any opinion about anything here, no matter how misguided, ill-informed, or positively ridiculous, and it really does not get on my nerves at all. People are people, and I fully accept this, and quite frankly I have had misconceptions in my life, and been corrected and understand the nature of this process entirely and completely.

However, the one thing that makes me absolutely crazy on this site is people constantly reiterating through campaigns is that nothing matters because we just have to get out the vote (GOTV) or that there is only one poll that matters. Yes… We know this… There is virtually no one who posts here who is not voting or helping promulgate to the best of their ability to their circle of friends and acquaintances the Democratic mantra and/or working in the campaign in some form or another and/or donating money.

As far as there being “only one poll that matters“, nothing could be further from the truth. Political campaigns use polls and trends to determine which segment of the population requires more attention, and despite the networks and mainstream media’s desire to show a photo finish horse race every year, I believe that either side can take heart or feel some despair from polling when evaluated in context. Without polling, It would be like saying “I don’t need my gas gauge because I know how far I drove from the last time I filled up the tank”. There are many factors which come into play and reliable polling is helpful to make competent decisions as to how the campaign should proceed from that point on.

So please, try not to negate individual’s posts by instructing them that such and such doesn’t matter. It matters to them, and it’s not like they are practicing Nancy Reagan’s astrology. I thank you for permitting me to rant. ( And yes…I am aware, well aware, that there are slanted polls and push polls. I’m referring to reasonably well-constructed polls. )

[Think. Again.]

1. After the majority of polls...

....left probable Clinton voters believing they didn't need to vote in 2016, I tend to dissuade people from taking polls too seriously.

Also, the internal campaign polling and trend studies you mentioned are much different things than the polls written to grab attention to media advertisements.

[padfun]

17. I don't think anyone didn't vote who was going to.

It just doesn't work that way, and besides, ballots have LOTS of other things on them. I never met a person who didn't vote because "we were winning."

I think Comey's statement about Hillary affected lots of people who were on the fence vote for Trump. I think this was the biggest culprit.

And Nate Silver had Trump at 33%, not some miniscule number.

[getagrip_already]

19. Thats not true...

Not only did some not vote, many voted for third parties as protest votes, assuming the election was won.

Additionally, in MI alone, there were so many ballots cast that were straight dem but left the potus slot empty, that had they voted for clinton we would have won the state.

Voters absolutely thought they could toss their vote and it wouldnt matter.

[COL Mustard]

26. I hope that was

A painful lesson learned. Every vote matters!

I say that as a former 3rd party protest voter. I’ll never make that mistake again!

[stopdiggin]

35. which rather makes the point for padfun

rather than the post they responded to (ThinkAgain)
And in either case the mantra of "polls don't count"- that the OP is trying to refute - is both facile and more importantly just wrong.

[getagrip_already]

37. My point is polls are garbage and shouldnt be relied upon or influence your vote

Good polls are just tastier garbage, but just as unreliable.

Look at them like a hurrican forecast of a tropical low off the coast of africa.

The wx channel will hype the storms to the max, and once in a while they will be right. But a depression off africa is something to watch, not change plans over.

And no, the analogy doesnt follow that because forecasts get more accurate as storms approach, so should polls. One doesnt follow the other to that extent.

[stopdiggin]

44. and my opinion leans toward pretty much all of that being wrong

more or less start to finish. Starting out with "polls are garbage". And finishing with the final assertion that, 'they don't become more accurate ..' They almost certainly do!

[Think. Again.]

27. I disagree, Clinton's win was touted as a fairly sure thing..

...there were quite a few people who just didn't think their vote was necessary, just as so many people in solid red or blue states feel.

[TheKentuckian]

38. I woke up sick on an election day and was trying the excuses

on myself but in the end there was no way I could take even the one in a trillion chance that we fall short by my vote.

Nope. Never on my watch is that chance worth avoiding a little inconvenience.
Too many have sacrificed too much to provide me with the opportunity for me to flush their blood, sweat, tears, and lives down the toilet.

The safest districts and states go the other way if too many bullshit themselves that someone else is going to fulfill their duties.

Lazy, arrogant, and entitled should come with a maximum limit of one of the options but this "thinking" hits all three in one fell swoop.

The winners show up.

[Think. Again.]

41. Good for you!

So back to the discussion.

Polls, which are by their very nature subject to whim, should not be relied on to decide if a person is going to vote or not, they serve no purpose at all EXCEPT to increase views on advertising.

[TheKentuckian]

49. Just fucking vote instead of mining for excuses not to or to "protest".

Everyone needs to do their basic duty.

[Think. Again.]

50. I agree! Ignore the polls, and vote!

[Ms. Toad]

29. I personally know people who voted for Trump to send "President" Clinton a message,

Because they were so confident that Clinton was going to win, and they weren't thrilled that she was the candidate, and wanted her to know she shouldn't assume she had the support of all Dems.

Their misguided choice wasn't based on polls (or at least not entirely based on polls), but in large part on the general sense that Trump was such a vile person there was no way he was going to win. They did believe that polls showing that he had a chance to win were the result of people messing with pollsters (saying they supported Trump when they didn't).

[stopdiggin]

39. +1. MUCH more in line with actual events on the ground.

People found all manner of (creative) reasons for not voting for Hillary. The Republicans weren't the only people that were in a pissy mood ...

[Ms. Toad]

45. I'd call it cocky. But the effect was the same.

Some people who unquestionably wanted Clinton if the alternative was Trump, but didn't think Clinton was the right candidate, believed it was safe to either not vote or to vote for Trump so that Clinton couldn't claim she had a massive mandate.

[stopdiggin]

47. Yeah, well ... Lesson learned.

I guess. Although my own opinion is - that's not quite enough .. And they all deserve a good swift kick ... (somewhere sure to cause a degree of discomfort)

[beaglelover]

24. Me too. After 2016 I don't believe in polls at all. Yes, it's OK to be enthusiastic, but don't think we have this

election in the bag based on polling or else you'll be sorely dissapointed like we all were in 2016. If you don't learn from your mistakes, you are bound to repeat them.

[DeepWinter]

2. Agree

And one step further. Don't embrace polls when they favor your bias, and reject polls when they are against your bias. Just keep them in context of the moment.

[Maeve]

3. Some are feeling a little high from the convention

And others are afraid we'll get cocky, so they try to ground us. Others are just killjoys.
Agree that good polls don't have to be met with discouragement all the time. We've gone to long without joy; let there be space for hope.

[ananda]

4. Whenever I read about a poll, I realize that really...

it's only the internals that matter.

I think each campaign knows exactly where they stand.

[DeepWinter]

5. Exactly

As Brooklynite has always been quick to point out, all campaigns utilize polls heavily to find areas of improvement to focus on. VP Harris has her own polling people, there is value there.

[Think. Again.]

28. As long as the public doesn't make the mistake...

...of thinking the polls that the public sees are anything like the internal polls the campaigns create and use.

[getagrip_already]

34. Internal polling usually measures far different metrics

Things like word association. Fill in the blank..

Similar to focus group questions but on a broader scale in focussed markets or demographics.

It helps them find both positives and negatives people have today. Then, if there is a pattern, they try to find a way to strengthen positives and weaken negatives.

They also find pockets of weakness that might otherwise get overlooked, and schedule a stop or surrogate to appear.

Who people will vote for is an important question, but they are more concerned with what they can do to move the needle in positive directions.

The public media polls are more horse race focussed, and more prone to error.

[gab13by13]

6. I am not talking about internal polls, we don't see them.

I am talking about the Romney/Obama Gallup poll that predicted a Romney win when Gallup was the king of polls.

When that poll was scrutinized, it was revealed that Gallup, the king of polls, used bad data in its formula, imagine that. It was either incompetent or complicit.

Sorry PC, and people can live and die on every poll that comes out, but the only polls that I truly believe in are exit polls.

[PCIntern]

7. I agree...Gallup wasn't reliable back in the

Kennedy/Johnson era.

[2 Meow Momma]

8. Thank you for putting my thoughts into words in a beautiful way. nt

[ALBliberal]

9. Thanks for posting!!!

[UTUSN]

10. "negate posts" - taking this topic to the general, next level - it is SO

disheartening, especially with meaningful content that took significant thought and effort, for somebody to use the very first/keynote Reply to unload on how they hate the Subject, how unworthy it is to exist, and how much of a PERSONAL PEEVE it is to them in their personal preferences. Even when an OP is just a throwaway, frivolous, idiosyncratic - the grumpy poster feels obligated to leave the droppings behind instead of just skipping past it to the THOUSANDS of other threads that are more worth their time in posting.

[gab13by13]

11. Someone do me a favor

make a list of reliable pollsters and unreliable pollsters because I don't know how to figure it out.

I guarantee everyone this, what can Magats do to counter that spectacular convention? The only thing I can think of is to come out with a slew of bogus polls trying to minimize the impact that convention had. I guarantee that will happen.

[Pototan]

12. Wow, that's exactly how I feel

Thanks for the post.

K&R

[TBF]

13. Polls are a tool like anything else - and we do need to pay attention to them

After all, by most accounts, polls played a large role in Biden's decision to step aside. When he did that the whole (sane) part of the country knew it needed to be done & rejoiced when Kamala got up there and threw her heart into the campaign. Look at the convention week we just had! I haven't felt this kind of excitement since 2008.

All of this exists on a spectrum of course. The more pragmatic amongst us will be giving warnings to not be too confident - that is important too. It is imperative to get out the vote. Yes, certain states are critical given the electoral college, but we also have all the congressional seats so every state needs to be considered. In my view, there has to be a balance between not being too confident, but also not letting realism steal your joy.

I feel like we can win this thing: Si se puede!

[Think. Again.]

32. Polls created by, or bought by, and used in for-profit media ....

...are specifically and only tools used by that for-profit media to create views on their advertising spaces.

If the public loses interest in news about the election, a sure-fire way to get more views back on advertisements is to present a controversial or exciting poll, so the media has one written or writes it themselves, and all of a sudden everyone believes everyone who was polled is saying a certain thing.

It's a con.

[TBF]

46. Meh, you're going to have to find someone else to rain on -

Polls aside, most important thing I'm seeing is a lot of excitement in folks around me. Actual people that I know who were not excited about a rerun election. They are thrilled to see a new candidate who is under 70 years old. We've got a candidate, like we did in 2008, who can win this thing! Let's be positive - and get to work.

[Think. Again.]

48. I agree!

I didn't mean to rain on anything, just trying to point out the dangers of pretending that advertisement bait is a legitimate election tool.

[niyad]

14. Hey, why are you picking on astrology???

[PCIntern]

15. Of course,

I forgot that stars which are septillion miles from each other but are superimposed over earth to sort of look like a warrior or animal will determine my future!!! 😁😁😁



(Your humor is understood)

[niyad]

16. Waving back!!!

[Sky Jewels]

18. Thank you!

I’m beyond sick of those cliches.

Eg.: “We have to vote!” … Yeah, no shit, Sherlock.

[CaptainTruth]

20. Thank you!!!

I've gotten tired of the same thing. I dont post many OPs but I've recently thought about just stopping, not posting any OPs anymore, because of some of the comments I've received.

I thought DU was supposed to be a place where we all supported Democrats, & we're all Democrats, so what's up with that?

[bigtree]

21. this should be pinned to the top of the forum

...absolutely let folks here advocate in their own fashion.

Appreciate the diversity of support.

[KPN]

22. Wait. I once travelled across 4 countries and back in a VW bus -- or a Combi as they called it --

with a broken gas gauge and was comfortable doing so "because I [knew] how far I drove from the last time I filled up the tank” .

What has this got to do with this OP? Nothing. It just reminded me of something I did way back in 1978 when I was young and invincible. It was really quite the adventure, though at times somewhat harrowing, once because of the broken gas gauge in fact.

Aside from this:

Thank You ... for your comment. I wholeheartedly agree! 100%! I n fact, we all should. Are we not the party of tolerance?

[Rubyshoo]

23. Easy Peasy...

And it happens all over our worlds...

Some are more interestred in showing everybody else how smart, clever, educated, well-informed, accurate, pure they are, than considering if posted materials actually work.

What do I mean by that, well... I lurked for the longest time, and only jumped in because of the tectonic desision Joe Biden was facing.

Point being, a whole LOT of people view/lurk DU without ever joining in. And they all have friends and family, and when they get challenged on where they are getting their information, they mention DU. Which in turn causes more people to come to DU to check it out, which diseminates more information to the wider world.

Ripples on a pond, as it were...

And... no matter how juvenile, no matter how silly and seemingly futile a post may come across, it may be the one thing that gets some lurker to reconsider their position.

And THAT is worth all the tea in China, no ?

IOW - I just roll my eyes and shrug my shoulders when the tsk, tskers come around.

We got work to DU.

[SpankMe]

25. I applaud your enthusiasm and positivity, but...

1. Polls these days are unreliable and are no longer representative of how the public thinks. This is an artifact of: a) runaway misinformation we're exposed to in the internet era and the new fragmented media landscape; b) the deteriorating ability of pollsters to reach a truly random sample of respondents (since no one uses landline phones any more); c) the deteriorating ability of pollsters to craft questions that are neutral and germane enough to get to meaningful results, and; d) we've become so polarized that people are lying when contacted by pollsters in order to deliberately throw them off.

Since GW Bush's term, election outcomes have deviated significantly from poll predictions, whereas before that (going back a century) polls tracked election results almost dead nuts. Exit polling was considered the gold standard. These days, exit pollsters get assaulted.

I think that polls can give a good picture of trends, if repeated with the same respondent pool and with the same questions over time. And we can rely on polls to predict binary results if the margins are large. But if the margins are small, then it's a toss-up. For example, if a poll shows Harris up by 6 in some state, she could still and up loosing there. If multiple poll results show Harris up by 20, however, then we can bank on a win in that region.

2. GOTV should be our focus. In 2016, Trump won Wisconsin by 24,000 votes out of over 3 million cast. In Michigan, he won by 11,000 votes out of 5 million cast! These were paper-thin victories that awarded the Orange Asshole® 26 precious electoral votes. Losing by eleven thousand out of 5 million is infuriating. That's around 0.2% - a very small number. It's practically a rounding error.

Those 11,000 votes were denied to Hillary by people who couldn't be bothered to vote because they thought Trump couldn't win, or because they had poker night on election day and had to go buy beer instead of vote, or were young people who were too cynical to vote and thought they could "punish" Democrats by withholding their vote, or people who were too lazy to order a mail-in ballot, or a million other reasons people use to get out of their civic responsibility to vote.

Getting the vote out in battle ground states where margins are small should be an emphasis item for us. We should be thinking tactically at this stage. It's a battle of inches.

[harumph]

33. This is absolutely correct.

I'm very optimistic - but sober. Celebrations are more appropriate after a victory, not before.

[stopdiggin]

43. polling is greatly improved (if you're talking about any of legitimate and respected ones)

(people have metrics to evaluate these things, with most polls offering up their methodology).
And the idea that polling has gotten worse - is just flatly wrong. (and promulgated mostly by the 'cellphones!' cranks - which is at least 15 years out of date)

[4lbs]

30. Without "internal polls" we wouldn't be brimming with excitement about Kamala Harris.

Think about it.

Nancy Pelosi used her "internal poll" results to convince Joe Biden to drop out and endorse Kamala Harris.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/17/politics/nancy-pelosi-biden-conversation/index.html

July 17, 2024

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi privately told President Joe Biden in a recent conversation that polling shows that the president cannot defeat Donald Trump and that Biden could destroy Democrats’ chances of winning the House in November if he continues seeking a second term, according to four sources briefed on the call.

The president responded by pushing back, telling Pelosi he has seen polls that indicate he can win, one source said. Another one of the sources described Biden as getting defensive about the polls. At one point, Pelosi asked Mike Donilon, Biden’s longtime adviser, to get on the line to talk over the data.


So, the next time someone says a poll doesn't matter.....

[bucolic_frolic]

31. Polling depends on methodology and sampling

Some polls use carefully selected samples chosen to mirror actual demographic segments. Others don't know who has a cell phone or who answers the phone. Lump all polls together and get an average. Somewhere in there is accuracy. Party campaign polls know what's going on. They're paid to know. M$M is paid to get ratings. No wonder we only get trends instead of accuracy.

[BattleRow]

36. No matter which ,

I want to see Harris poll vault high enough to smash that glass ceiling to smithereens!

[central scrutinizer]

40. Polls showing Harris winning have one good use

They drive TSF into a blind rage.

[PCIntern]

42. They Soitenly do!!!!

[CoopersDad]

51. Agree. Everyone is an expert in their own experience...

We should never assume that we know better than they do what things "matter".

This guy explained that principle to a group of us a few years ago.
He also said that the people with the problems are the people with the solutions.
So smart, so right.

[mucholderthandirt]

52. Polls do indeed matter. It's how most people figure out who to vote for, in the end.

Not everyone is up on all the ins and outs of politics, about things that really matter no matter what party you are. So when they see polls that show certain things, they pay attention to that.

Right or wrong.

And they don't know the media -- all of it -- is biased because of who owns them.

What I hate is that people don't really explain polls. Early on they basically don't tell you much. And no one says that polls are just a small (sometimes really, really small) sampling of people who answer a landline. A lot of people I know don't even have landlines, and they don't answer numbers they don't recognize. I know I don't. And I don't give out my cell number. No one but family has that, and the stupid government security checking bots.

So, old people who like to talk to strangers are mostly what people see. Young people are on social media, like Tik Tok. You want their opinion? Go there. Hit them up on Instagram and the like. Heck, you can just read what they post and you know pretty much all there is to know.