Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Democratic Primaries
In reply to the discussion: Not many polls in December for first states in Democratic primary [View all]Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)20. If it's a conspiracy against your candidate, why have they decreased each cycle since 2008?
Maybe you should look into it more instead of throwing around conspiracy theories. The reality is that polling is far harder today than it was in 2008. It doesn't take someone with an advanced degree in statistics to understand this.
In 2008, 80% of U.S. households had a landline, while only 20% used cellphones only.
Today? Only 41.7% of U.S. households have a landline - 54.9% of households are 'cellphone only':

That is a dramatic, massive decrease from 2008 - an election that was only a little over a decade ago.
Fact: polling cellphones is much harder today than it is to poll landlines.
Fact: Americans willing to participate in polls is at an all-time low.
Pews data suggest that decline is underway again, with response rates slipping to 7 percent in 2017 and 6 percent in 2018. Whats to blame for the recent slippage? Kennedy says its harder to get people to complete polls over cell phones because they are getting more calls they dont want, which makes them less likely to talk to pollsters.
Its our sense that that exponential increase in robocalls, spoofing of incoming calls, pretending theyre a local number, has really changed the environment in using a cell phone, said Kennedy.
What does this change mean? It means pollsters have to weigh their sample differently to be as accurate as possible, which also means more effort is placed into mining the results - and yes, more money:
(W)ith the rise of cellphones and the increasing prevalence of people who decline to answer or complete surveys, how do you ensure that those you are interviewing are in fact representative of the underlying population? Cook said. This is not an intractable problem, but it places a premium on rigorous methodology, which can be complicated and costly.
This article was from January, 2018 - long before Bernie announced he was running for president. And they came to the same consensus as the article you posted: it takes more money to poll today than it did a decade-plus ago because of the changing demographics. That is why there's fewer polls today than four years ago and eight years ago twelve years ago.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
37 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
They knew Bernie would be surging in December but didn't want to promote it. n/t
Uncle Joe
Dec 2019
#2
Not everything that happens is an anti-Bernie conspiracy, Uncle Joe. maybe they just got tired of
beastie boy
Dec 2019
#7
He will need to do a hell of a lot more sliding before he can challenge anyone for the #2 position!
beastie boy
Dec 2019
#10
That changes in December; only six weeks away from the vote. In 2016 they had 14 polls
Uncle Joe
Dec 2019
#12
It's not bullshit - & there's a clear trend. Polling has significantly decreased each election cycle
Drunken Irishman
Dec 2019
#14
I guess that's one advantage individual donors and donations have over polls,
Uncle Joe
Dec 2019
#17
If it's a conspiracy against your candidate, why have they decreased each cycle since 2008?
Drunken Irishman
Dec 2019
#20