The latest general opinion polls in the US presidential election, coming after the September 10 debate, show Republican candidate, Donald Trump, still trailing his Democratic challenger, Kamala Harris, with a neck-and-neck margin of error.
While this no doubt gives the Democrats a little more push and strength in the nervy business of election campaigns, it goes without saying, and especially from previous voting experience in the US presidentials, that survey scores were better trusted no further than their face value.
Psephology, the scientific study of election trends is a pretty tricky endeavour, and in a critical electorate like that of the US, allegiance changes in tune with daily developments. That’s why opinion polls may be or may not be the best determinant of voter choices.
An opinion poll is information collated by interviewing and creating statistics showing the different percentages of how many people think ‘this’ and how many are for ‘that.’ Opinion surveys are usually designed to represent a population by conducting a series of questions and then extrapolating generalities in ratio or within confidence intervals.
We are in the thick of the election campaign, and it is customary for pollsters to perpetually announce results concerning the strengths of political parties and the popularity of their candidates.
However, historically, to find out what a person thinks is a problem is as old as the origin of humanity. And to assume that people can be categorised ‘for’ and ‘against’ is just mere theory. It is unsound for one to assert that there exists an identifiable empirical procedure that is capable of measuring people’s opinion. A case study is the 2016 election. The unexpected turn in the election tallies in favour of Trump against rival Hillary Clinton immediately raised a question about the value of modern polling, such as: can it accurately capture public opinion when so many people are now so hard to reach on their unlisted cellphones? Politics is not just about numbers; data can’t always capture the complex human condition that is the blood of American politics. Having said that, surveys have so dominated US elections that they have replaced rationality and wisdom as the voters’ tools in choosing their leaders. By generating a “bandwagon” effect and encouraging trending, surveys have been known to impair the electoral system’s capacity to generate rational and wise voting.
In order to guard against surveys based on dubious assumptions and flawed methodology, the fundamental questions to be asked are: how impartial are the pollsters? And do the data captured and generated meet the universal standards to be termed as empirical survey? In his book, The Broken Compass, Peter Hitchens authoritatively asserts that opinion polls are a mere device for influencing public opinion. There are theories about how this happens and can be split into two groups, namely: bandwagon, underdog effects and strategic (“tactical”) voting.
Surveys are thought to have undermined democracy by influencing the electorate’s choice. The Media and public attention they receive detracts voters or the public in general from real politics of ideas and realistic issues affecting the populace. Hence, the role of free discussion and reflection is significantly reduced. In his book, ‘The Reasoning Voter,’ this is what political scientist, Samuel Popkin calls the “low information rationality.” The Media know this but dutifully report them and voters consume acres of information on poll results. A voter’s response to a pollster or interviewer, which I can label ‘cognitive response’ (as opposed to affective response), may not align with their initial conception of the electoral reality. In response, the voter is likely to generate a ‘mental list’ in which they create reasons for a party’s loss or gain in the polls. Publication of the opinion polls ought to be given another impetus because it gives unfair merit to candidates whose fortunes seem to be improving. Polls also affect other key actors in the electoral process, for instance, financial supporters, volunteers, celebrity endorsers and media practitioners. Their collective decisions significantly change campaign, thus influence the voters and condition the public’s attitude toward the election outcome. Though repeated, correct forecasts by surveys have given their predictions a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The limitations of opinion polls notwithstanding, the steady lead kept this far by Harris over Trump certainly presents a basis for an assessment of general indications, however relative. Proof of Republican nervousness of their low ebb and the ascendancy of the Democrats, is the yarn spurned by Trump to the effect that “the Democrats will cheat in the November polls as they did in 2020.”
The Democrats appear well in control of the race, gaining enough ground on the terrain of public opinion since President Joe Biden passed the torch unto his Vice President Harris on July 21, 2024. It’s been simply phenomenal how that move has swung the trend lines and momentum in favour of the Democrats going into the election.
However, as former President, Barack Obama said during the Democratic National Convention, “make no mistake, this race will be close right to the end.” And opinion polls generally carry the kind of suspense and unpredictability characteristic of long distance races.