It was
obvious our speaker knew a lot about the polling work she does and about the
history of think tanks. She seemed to be the Jane-of-all-trades at the think
tank where she works and that was an inspiring role to see. Additionally, her
insight into the history of public opinion allowed the class to hear about the
continuity, change and contradictions over time in the United States that I
didn’t get from the reading.
The continuity in polls over time has been on
topics concerning foreign affairs and religion. However, there has been slight
changes recently. The subtle increase in the number of Americans who believe we
should stay out of war seems to be related to the Trump administration. We have
always had a religious country, but since the growth of generation Z and millennials,
the number of people with no religious affiliation has grown. One of the more
notable progressive changes that has occurred over time is the support for a
women president. The belief that a woman could effectively run the country has
increased from 33 percent in 1933 to 96 percent in this last election. The
polls concerning the ability of a Catholic, Muslim, African-American, or Gay person
to be a good president has also increased significantly over time. The most
fascinating information for me to hear about was the popular contradictions
within the American public. For example, in general, the public wants to have a
strong military, but does not want to send troops abroad. Contradictions like
these have some logical sense, however, it is hard to build policy in such a
grey area. Our speaker even mentioned this when discussing civic responsibility
because most people tend to stay out of the controversy when there are
contradictions. This fear of controversy paired with the difficulties of being an
informed and involved citizen today reflect the unstable basis of polls for
policy. The speaker was quick to point out how these characteristics of polls
and the public opinion should not directly influence policy.
The reading
and our guest mentioned the need to stay involved in politics. But even our
reading explained that civic duties today are much more extensive than back in
the day. Because of the fast pace world we are in and the internet’s ability to
spread news so quickly, politics are much harder to always be on top of.
However, unlike our reading, the speaker stated several times throughout our meeting
that “polls are too crude/blunt to decide policy, but can learn about American
society from them.” In an ideal democracy, public opinion directly shapes
policy, but because of the system of democracy here, our elected officials do
not necessary have to listen to the public. Also, in America, there is a lot of
room for money and therefore, a lot of room for outside influence.
It
surprised me that polls have only been asking about emotions since the 80’s,
since emotions carry so much weight in someone’s thought process most of the
time. Emotions, however, are another reason to take every poll with a grain of
salt since you don’t know how the people being polled felt that day. Another
issue with using polls to influence policy that was talked about both the
speaker and the reading is the lack of nuance in the polling questions. As I
stated earlier, there are contradicting beliefs sometimes and certain circumstances
where polling cannot address these specific issues of a political opinion.
Lastly, it was comforting to know that she believed most politicians did not
base their policy on polls alone, but on their personal convictions.
I
appreciated her take on the role media has played in polling because we tend to
get caught up in all the fake news scandal, but polling is affected by the
competitive media environment. Everyone wants an accurate poll to back up their
claim on the news, so pollsters tend to cater the topics of their poll to what
the news outlets will need. Our speaker pointed out how this limits the
polling. Polling is used to know the public opinion on anything, not just
politics. She shared with us that America’s favorite color is blue and has been
for quite some time. I agree with her that polls like this are necessary even
though they may not be related to the news scandal of the day. Our speaker also
addressed the failure to trust polls today because of mistaken predictions like
the 2016 election and Brexit. She discussed the decline of the polling business
and projected it would be about ten years or so before the whole business
became obsolete. I hope polling finds a way to change their dependence on the
political media because polls allow our citizens to see how our society
progresses over time.
Hi Caitlyn! Thank you for posting such a well-thought out post and for your details about what our speaker said (I mostly wrote down punchlines and key words).
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your analysis of polling, especially the concept of contradictory notions and the overkill of political polls. I agree with you that contradictions that occur in polling are often based in a logical setting and that, as our speaker made clear, should not be used to make policy. I think beyond contradictory mindsets, the fragility of the human mind is a huge obstacle to polls in general. As you mentioned, we are a changing society and we are becoming more emotional, and more open-minded - yet all it takes is one biased word in a poll, or your dog pooping in your shoes before you pick up the phone to answer a poll to change your opinion or answer.
I think that the demise of polls will, as you caught from our speaker, be obsolete soon and I think that this is due to many factors, most of which you touched on: emotional instability, contradictions, media influence, and I'll add in, a lack of knowledge. Your analysis of the difficulty of keeping up with politics is spot on and I think this is a large issue in general for our citizenry, not just the polling business. As we are in election season, I am looking back at my old Facebook posts urging friends to vote, to use their smartphones for more than dog selfies and be knowledgeable about the world, but our discussion in class last week has helped me understand the immense burden today's flurry of politics and overbearing media coverage.
As I mention in my post and have gathered from our readings and from reality, polls are not always accurate. Polls do not fully reflect the opinions of the American people. We are talking about a people who the majority of don't understand that the Affordable Care Act and Obamacare are the same thing. And I think this hearkens back to our readings about the type of government and the idea that we could not trust the public to be informed and therefore could not trust them to have an opinion on policy or the people we elected. I wish I could say that we have progressed in a significant manner, but as the pessimistic politico I am, I cannot.
I hope that even as polls decline in their relevancy, politicians and pollsters and the media who use these to gauge public opinion, find a new way to understand the public and maybe find a better mechanism for incorporating public opinion into our government. I would love to hear your thoughts on this as well as our speakers!