• Wrench@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Nor are they even remotely reliable to gauge things in the short term.

    The methodology of collecting this data can be so heavily bias that the pollers can get whatever result they’re looking for, if they’re pursuing a narrative. I could write a poll that leads the poll takers to just about any desired conclusion by choosing very targeted questions with bad faith multiple choice options, and by conducting the polls targeting specific demographics. It’s a trivial thing to do.

    Instead, you have to deep dive into the polling methodology, have a deep understanding of the quality of the poll operators, etc, to have any idea of if the poll was even trustworthy.

    I, for one, dismiss polls entirely. There is too much disinformation, too many bad actors, whose entire goal is to “prove” their own biases in favor of their narrative, that the amount of shit buries the truth. So it seems a pointless exercise to sift through the shit to find the nuggets of truth, particularly when good faith polling isn’t at all reliable in the first place.

    • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Exactly, also the expert in the article says basically the same thing in more diplomatic language:

      However, speaking to Newsweek Todd Landman, a professor of political science at Nottingham University in the U.K., said it was “still too far out from the election” to read much into swing state polls.

      He said: “The race remains highly volatile, and it is still too far out from the election to make any firm conclusion from changing polls across these swing states.”