The onslaught of US presidential polls has already begun. You may be tempted to avoid the polling deluge, but the results of these surveys do influence the campaign. That is why we want to show you how to read, or ignore, the polls like a professional.
TRUST POLLING AVERAGES
Polls with surprising or novel results can be irresistible to journalists and the public alike. It is newsworthy if public attitudes seem to have changed in some unexpected way. As a result, these findings tend to attract the most public attention and media coverage. Unfortunately, they are the most likely to be spurious.
Illustration: Lance Liu
What looks like a shift in public opinion is often just random statistical variation. First, all polls should come with an associated margin of error or some other estimate of uncertainty. Take it seriously. With the sample sizes conventionally used in polling, changes in support of one or two percentage points can not be distinguished from random variation. Second, given the number of polls that are conducted, outliers are likely to be common. Approximately one in 20 polls of US President Barack Obama’s approval rating, for instance, will produce a statistically significant change from the last estimate even if nothing changed.
Instead of being seduced by potential outliers or statistical noise in individual polls, rely on polling averages like the ones provided by the Huffington Post’s Pollster or Real Clear Politics, which better distinguish between genuine changes in public opinion and random noise. When an average picks up shifts in opinion across multiple polls, we can be more certain that the views of the public are changing.
When people ignore averages and focus on an individual poll with an extreme value, they are often led astray. For example, a Gallup article last year highlighted former US secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton as having by far the best net favorable ratings of the potential presidential candidates tested: +19 (55 percent favorable versus 36 percent unfavorable). However, the poll was an outlier compared with both Gallup’s previous poll, which had her at +11 and other polls of Clinton’s favorability conducted at about the same time. Sure enough, the next Gallup poll had her at, you guessed it, +11, suggesting that her advantage over the Republican candidates tested (many of whom had net favorables of +6 to +12) was less clear than the original articles suggested.
At this stage in the campaign, approximately six months before the first primaries, eventual nominees have traditionally been among the top three or four candidates in the polls.
However, if it is usually important for a candidate to be among the leaders, it is virtually irrelevant who the actual leader is. Early polls often reflect name recognition more than anything else. Donald Trump, for instance, has come in first or second in a number of recent national polls of Republican candidates, but he is hardly a top-tier candidate.
What should you pay attention to instead of polls? Endorsements. Political science research suggests that endorsements from party elites are better predictors than polls. First, these officials can help candidates win by rallying supporters to their side and providing financial and organizational help. And party elites observe the contenders closely and can often anticipate which candidates are most likely to succeed.
Historically, front-runners start to pull away in the endorsement race at this point. Clinton is doing that; she stands out as the most dominant Democratic candidate in the contemporary era. By contrast, almost all the action is yet to come for Republicans.
BE MINDFUL OF GAFFES
Despite the media frenzies that often result, campaign “gaffes” like Obama saying “The private sector is doing fine,” in 2012 rarely matter much.
Much of the news coverage that suggests otherwise is the result of what psychologists call confirmation bias: the tendency to believe evidence that supports our pre-existing views. For example, a recent Washington Post column suggested that Obama’s approval ratings had improved because of a series of policy victories, but the argument relied on a single poll and neglected the fact that other polls showed no change.
Gaffes can matter, however, when they damage the prospects of a candidate among crucial party elites. Rick Perry’s “oops” moment in the 2012 race was the capstone on a series of poor debate performances and other mistakes that helped doom his candidacy with party insiders and activists.
HEED THE RHYTHM
Presidential candidates’ images and support levels tend to change in predictable ways. For instance, Clinton’s poll numbers were always going to decline as she returned to the partisan fray after serving as the nation’s chief diplomat, which removed her from day-to-day politics. It therefore should not be surprising that her public image became less favorable during the early stages of her campaign.
Correspondingly, when candidates announce their campaigns, their support almost invariably rises. As front-runners like former Florida governor Jeb Bush, US Senator Marco Rubio and Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker become better known, Republicans are more likely to tell pollsters that they view these candidates favorably, but these candidates are in turn subject to more scrutiny and criticism. As a result, the number of people who view them unfavorably might also grow and their numbers might correspondingly decline, especially for those who cannot survive the “scrutiny” phase of the campaign.
Few Democrats, for instance, know that US Senator Bernie Sanders has often opposed gun control measures supported by their party, but more are likely to learn about his record as campaign coverage intensifies and Clinton surrogates and press coverage become more critical. And many Republicans have not yet heard of Trump’s numerous contributions to Democratic campaigns or the many positive statements he has made about prominent Democratic officials like Obama and Clinton. When primary voters learn more about the history of Sanders and Trump, their polling numbers are likely to decline.
THE BOTTOM LINE
Polls play an important role in presidential primaries, influencing the strategies of the candidates, the coverage they receive from the news media and the choices of voters who want to avoid wasting their vote. For political mavens they are also often an amusing way to follow the horse race.
So go ahead and pay attention to the polls if you want, but do it smartly. Do not overreact to individual polls or fall for weak pundit analysis. Instead, remember that campaigns have predictable rhythms and that endorsements might be a better predictor of who will ultimately prevail than who is up or who is down right now.
For the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), China’s “century of humiliation” is the gift that keeps on giving. Beijing returns again and again to the theme of Western imperialism, oppression and exploitation to keep stoking the embers of grievance and resentment against the West, and especially the US. However, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that in 1949 announced it had “stood up” soon made clear what that would mean for Chinese and the world — and it was not an agenda that would engender pride among ordinary Chinese, or peace of mind in the international community. At home, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) launched
Late last month, Beijing introduced changes to school curricula in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, requiring certain subjects to be taught in Mandarin rather than Mongolian. What is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) seeking to gain from sending this message of pernicious intent? It is possible that he is attempting cultural genocide in Inner Mongolia, but does Xi also have the same plan for the democratic, independent nation of Mongolia? The controversy emerged with the announcement by the Inner Mongolia Education Bureau on Aug. 26 that first-grade elementary-school and junior-high students would in certain subjects start learning with Chinese-language textbooks, as
The restructuring of supply chains, particularly in the semiconductor industry, was an essential part of discussions last week between Taiwan and a US delegation led by US Undersecretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment Keith Krach. It took precedent over the highly anticipated subject of bilateral trade partnerships, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) founder Morris Chang’s (張忠謀) appearance on Friday at a dinner hosted by President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) for Krach was a subtle indicator of this. Chang was in photographs posted by Tsai on Facebook after the dinner, but no details about their discussions were disclosed. With
There are worrying signs that China is on the brink of a major food shortage, which might trigger a strategic contest over food security and push Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), already under intense pressure, toward drastic measures, potentially spelling trouble for Taiwan and the rest of the world. China has encountered a perfect storm of disasters this year. On top of disruption due to the COVID-19 pandemic, torrential rains have caused catastrophic flooding in the Yangtze River basin, China’s largest agricultural region. Floodwaters are estimated to have already destroyed the crops on 6 million hectares of farmland. The situation has been