Arab News

Why did the opinion polls get it so wrong — again?

- MARIA MAALOUF For full version, log on to www.arabnews.com/opinion

Most political observers and analysts agree that the opinion polls got things very wrong in their prediction­s about the outcome of the 2020 presidenti­al election — just as they did in 2016. One possible explanatio­n given for why the polls failed to accurately predict the outcome of the contest between Donald Trump and Joe Biden is that pollsters struggled to cope because there was so much going on, including how the coronaviru­s pandemic was affecting voters, and the effects on the result of increased voting by mail and early voting. If there is one thing all pollsters agree on it is that there are lessons to be learned from every presidenti­al campaign, and failing to heed them will make it difficult for them to survive in the very competitiv­e market for political consulting. The discussion about how to improve polling methods must recognize that the needs of the American political system are not adequately being met by polls that continue to miss the mark about who will win elections and by how many votes.

Opinion polls are currently not contributi­ng positively to American democracy, and their consistent failure underlines the challenges in a liberal democracy of gauging the political views of citizens.

Following Trump’s defeat of Hillary Clinton in 2016, pollsters admitted the failings that led to their prediction of a Democratic victory. For example, they conceded that they placed too much emphasis on the opinions of people in big cities and major urban areas, and too little on the views of those in small towns and rural areas. Another mistake was to rely so heavily on the opinions of better-educated people, while voters without college degrees were underrepre­sented.

In the 2020 presidenti­al race, pollsters vowed that they would not repeat these and other mistakes, and insisted that their sampling included more people from diverse demographi­c, ethnic and educationa­l/ economic background­s. According to W. Joseph Campbell, a professor of communicat­ion at American University in Washington, DC, and author of “Lost in a Gallup: Polling Failure in US Presidenti­al Elections,” in the run-up to the 2020 election “the polls overestima­ted Biden’s lead by 5.8 percentage points.” Six weeks before the election, CNN published a story that stated: “If you were to look at the polling right now, there’s a pretty clear picture. Biden has leads of somewhere between five and

Twitter: @bilarakib eight points in a number of states Trump won four years ago: Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvan­ia and Wisconsin. Those, plus the states Hillary Clinton won, get Biden to about 290 electoral votes. If you add on the other states where Biden has at least a nominal edge in the averages (Florida and North Carolina), Biden is above 330 electoral votes.”

These polls were outright wrong in terms of the gaps between the candidates.

It seems, therefore, that those who attempt to analyze and predict trends and results in the American democratic process need to undertake a process of self-examinatio­n.

There is no guarantee that people will tell the truth when asked for their political views or voting intentions. There are no laws to punish people who tell a caller from a polling agency that they intend to vote for one candidate but then choose another. There is no obligation to stick with an answer given to pollsters.

This seems to have happened in the 2020 presidenti­al election, as Biden’s lead in key states turned out to be slimmer than the polls predicted. The media in general underestim­ated the level of support for Trump. He was portrayed as a weak, helpless incumbent whose presidency was collapsing due to his personal behavior, and the consequenc­es of his reaction to the coronaviru­s pandemic.

Yet Trump proved to be more competitiv­e than expected in the election, so it seems likely that a significan­t number of his supporters did not reveal they would be voting for him when asked.

This might be explained by the fact that some voters were reluctant to reveal their support for Trump because he was portrayed as racist and sexist, and blamed by critics for the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans due his controvers­ial response to the pandemic.

Moreover, polls are long, detailed and ask too many questions. Increasing­ly, they can be accessed by individual­s online. This favors Democratic voters, whose supporters are likely to be more computer literate than Republican voters, who are less well-educated on average. Also, pollsters can overly complicate their canvassing by splitting people into groups such as “registered voters” and “likely to vote.” People do not like complicate­d questions. Instead, questions should be as simple as “who are you going to vote for as president this year?”

Polling firms were more concerned with measuring Trump’s unpopulari­ty, which turned out not to be an accurate reflection of voting intentions. The end result was prediction­s that were largely lopsided.

 ??  ?? Maria Maalouf is a Lebanese journalist, broadcaste­r, publisher and writer. She holds an MA in political sociology from the
University of Lyon.
Maria Maalouf is a Lebanese journalist, broadcaste­r, publisher and writer. She holds an MA in political sociology from the University of Lyon.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Saudi Arabia