{"id":97878,"date":"2016-11-08T10:55:42","date_gmt":"2016-11-08T15:55:42","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/countingpips.com\/?p=97878"},"modified":"2016-11-08T06:56:26","modified_gmt":"2016-11-08T11:56:26","slug":"presidential-election-the-science-of-polls","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/2016\/11\/presidential-election-the-science-of-polls\/","title":{"rendered":"Presidential Election: The Science of Polls"},"content":{"rendered":"
November 8, 2016<\/div>
\r\n<\/div><\/div>

By WallStreetDaily.com<\/u><\/a> \"Presidential<\/p>\n

Hard as it may be to believe, public opinion polling is actually grounded in science. Sure, vagaries of statistical analysis create meaningful \u2014 and exploitable \u2014 gaps. But let\u2019s not let demagogues feed our paranoia.<\/strong><\/i><\/p>\n

\n

Today is the first day of the next four years of American political life.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s been a messy election.<\/p>\n

And though we\u2019ll probably have a \u201cwinner\u201d by late tonight or early Wednesday morning, what\u2019s now a perpetual partisan contest will continue.<\/p>\n

The first battle is likely to be over the vote count in crucial \u201cswing states\u201d \u2014 like Florida, for example, where we\u2019ve seen this movie before, and Ohio, where the 2004 election was decided.<\/p>

\r\n
\r\n

Free Reports:<\/p><\/div>\r\n

\r\n

<\/a>\r\n\t Get Our Free Metatrader 4 Indicators<\/u><\/b><\/a> - Put Our Free MetaTrader 4 Custom Indicators on your charts when you join our Weekly Newsletter<\/p>

\r\n
\r\n
\r\n

<\/a>\r\n\t Get our Weekly Commitment of Traders Reports<\/u><\/b><\/a> - See where the biggest traders (Hedge Funds and Commercial Hedgers) are positioned in the futures markets on a weekly basis.<\/p>

\r\n<\/div>\r\n

\r\n
<\/div>\n

Donald Trump has already set the foundation for post-election challenges to the legitimacy of a potential Hillary Clinton win with a series of tweets citing voter fraud in specific locations and questioning the overall legitimacy of a process \u201cfixed\u201d by the mainstream media.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s a message that\u2019s resonating with his coalition.<\/p>\n

As for \u201clarge-scale,\u201d \u201cwidespread\u201d electoral fraud, it simply isn\u2019t happening.<\/p>\n

As Dale Ho of the American Civil Liberties Union writes in a November 3, 2016, Op-Ed published by The New York Times<\/em>, \u201cA comprehensive study by Justin Levitt, a senior Justice Department official, found only 31 credible allegations of in-person voter impersonation from 2000\u20132014, during which over one billion ballots were cast.\u201d<\/p>\n

That\u2019s about 0.0000031%. And it ain\u2019t enough to swing a presidential election.<\/p>\n

The logistics alone \u2014 it\u2019s not a single, national election, but 50 separate state elections \u2014 are impossible for a would-be fixer to navigate.<\/p>\n

One area of scientific inquiry that hasn\u2019t benefitted from the era of ubiquitous computing is public opinion polling.<\/p>\n

In short, the proliferation of mobile phones has made it harder for pollsters to reach enough people to generate a statistically significant sample size.<\/p>\n

Eight years ago, more than 80% of U.S. households used landlines. Today, less than 50% do.<\/p>\n

In the late 20th century, pollsters could get response rates approaching 40%. Now, they\u2019re connecting less than 10% of the time.<\/p>\n

One area of scientific inquiry that hasn\u2019t benefitted from the era of ubiquitous computing is public opinion polling.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Ramin Skibba recently broke down the elements of polling for the journal Nature<\/em>:<\/p>\n

\n

The ingredients of an accurate poll are fairly simple, but they can be hard to find, and everyone uses a different recipe to pull them all together. Start by recruiting a large group of people \u2014 preferably more than 1,000. The sample should be split evenly between women and men. And it should reflect the population\u2019s mix in terms of race, education, income, and geographical distribution, to represent these groups\u2019 different views and voting behaviors. Once the data are in hand, pollsters analyze the gaps in their sample and weight the results to account for groups that are underrepresented.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

This concept of \u201csampling\u201d and \u201cweighting\u201d to account for variability of group sizes has already generated some heat from right-leaning observers\/s**t-stirrers keen to support Trump\u2019s position in pursuit of anarchic aims\/fomenting chaos.<\/p>\n

Zero Hedge reported it this way: \u201cNew Podesta Email Exposes Playbook for Rigging Polls Through \u2018Oversamples<\/strong><\/a>.’\u201d<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, as the \u201cestablishment\u201d Pew Research Center explained it: \u201cOversampling Is Used to Study Small Groups, Not Bias Poll Results<\/strong><\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

According to Pew:<\/p>\n

\n

Oversampling is the practice of selecting respondents so that some groups make up a larger share of the survey sample than they do in the population. Oversampling small groups can be difficult and costly, but it allows polls to shed light on groups that would otherwise be too small to report on.<\/p>\n

This might sound like it would make the survey unrepresentative, but pollsters correct this through weighting. With weighting, groups that were oversampled are brought back in line with their actual share of the population \u2014 removing the potential for bias.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Zero Hedge quotes extensively from a series of \u201cPodesta\u201d emails from January 2008, including a summary of \u201cPolling & Media Recommendations\u201d compiled by an outfit called The Atlas Project, to conclude this is \u201chow you manufacture a 12-point lead for your chosen candidate and effectively chill the vote of your opposition.\u201d<\/p>\n

And it is, indeed, a compelling and convincing case.<\/p>\n

It works because it plays on one of the most difficult aspects of the polling process: gathering data from a representative sample that reflects the electorate.<\/p>\n

You\u2019re basically trying to predict who\u2019s going to show up and vote. And you\u2019re relying on the word of your respondents when you calculate \u201coversampling\u201d and \u201cweighting\u201d criteria.<\/p>\n

There\u2019s plenty of room for manipulation, too, particularly in service of whatever your \u201cmedia bias\u201d may be.<\/p>\n

At the same time, these folks guard their proprietary approaches closely because that\u2019s how they differentiate themselves and generate new business. It is actually in their best interests to generate accurate results.<\/p>\n

But it\u2019s a difficult problem.<\/p>\n

Failures of sampling and weighting led to what\u2019s already an infamous episode of polling error: the June 2016 \u201cBrexit\u201d vote.<\/p>\n

The 2015 general election in the U.K. was also characterized by widespread polling errors, due in large part to \u201cunder-sampling\u201d of Tory voters.<\/p>\n

Trump and his coalition point to the Brexit outcome as a sure sign of his continuing viability.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

His voters are enthusiastic about overthrowing the establishment, though they may also be a little reticent to identify themselves, like Conservative voters in the United Kingdom were in 2015 and 2016.<\/p>\n

This \u201cTory effect\u201d is compared to the \u201cBradley effect\u201d from the 1982 California gubernatorial campaign, where the African-American mayor of Los Angeles led his opponent, Republican nominee George Deukmejian, by a couple of points all the way up to Election Day but lost by a narrow margin.<\/p>\n

Research later revealed that survey respondents were hesitant to register opposition to Bradley when questioned by a real, live pollster. In the privacy of the voting booth, they could act without regard to social reaction.<\/p>\n

We\u2019ll only know late tonight\/early Wednesday morning.<\/p>\n

Trump will push the issue as long as he can. And should he prevail, you can be sure that Democrats will fight back against \u201cvoter suppression\u201d efforts in Florida, Ohio, and other jurisdictions.<\/p>\n

Either way, it looks like Election Day is just another battle \u2014 a major one, indeed, but still just another set piece in an endless scrum.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

We haven\u2019t even touched on the s**t-show to come should Hillary take the oath of office on January 20, 2017.<\/p>\n

Ed Kilgore, writing for New York<\/em> magazine\u2019s online Daily Intelligencer, cites right-wing bellwether Rush Limbaugh\u2019s October 5 commentary:<\/p>\n

\n

Hillary Clinton is the most prepared to be impeached in advance of any presidential candidate this country has ever had! Hillary Clinton will be elected to be impeached\u2026 By the way, I\u2019m not being glib. If elected, Hillary Clinton could be impeached based on what we already know, and there\u2019s plenty more yet to be discovered. Emails and other documents that could be used in impeachment proceedings are waiting to be found like Easter eggs laid out for 3-year-olds.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

It\u2019s not just a talk radio hot topic.<\/p>\n

In a recent interview with The Washington Post<\/em>, Rep. Trent Franks, a Republican from Arizona who heads the Constitution and Civil Justice Subcommittee, said he thought that \u201call options,\u201d including impeachment, \u201care definitely on the table.\u201d<\/p>\n

Sen. Ron Johnson, facing a tough re-election campaign in Wisconsin, has also said that should Hillary be elected, she should be impeached.<\/p>\n

One way that number crunchers mitigate potential errors built into a single pollster\u2019s methodology is to aggregate polls \u2014 creating, in effect, polls of polls.<\/p>\n

All the major aggregators \u2014 including RealClearPolitics<\/strong><\/a>, FiveThirtyEight<\/strong><\/a>, Princeton Election Consortium<\/strong><\/a>, PredictWise<\/strong><\/a>, and HuffPost Pollster<\/strong><\/a> \u2014 have Hillary winning today.<\/p>\n

Either way, it looks like Election Day is just another battle \u2014 a major one, indeed, but still just another set piece in an endless scrum.<\/p>\n

It will mark both an end and another beginning.<\/p>\n

\n

This Week In\u2026<\/h2>\n

Donald Trump is not going to \u201cmake American great again.\u201d<\/p>\n

Neither is Hillary Clinton the \u201cplus sign\u201d that will make us \u201cstronger together.\u201d<\/p>\n

But there is hope<\/strong><\/a>. And studies suggest it comes down to us \u2014 me and you, black and white, liberal and conservative \u2014 getting to know one another a little bit better.<\/p>\n

New Scientist<\/em> weighs in on \u201chow the U.S. can heal its political rift\u201d:<\/p>\n

\n

Thankfully, there is a way forward. Studies suggest that when people live with others who share their opinions, their decisions tend to become more extreme<\/strong><\/a>, and they tend to become more hostile to outside groups. But reminding people of basic, shared human qualities may help bridge the gap. One experiment reduced participants\u2019 anti-Arab prejudices by making them look at pictures of diverse families doing everyday things, and asking them to consider their own childhood memories versus foreigners\u2019 experiences (Journal of Experimental Social Psychology<\/strong><\/em><\/a>).<\/p>\n

In another study, white and Hispanic students signed up for several weeks of \u201cfriendship meetings\u201d with a stranger from the opposite background. Afterwards, students who had previously scored highly for implicit prejudice showed lower levels of the stress hormone cortisol<\/strong><\/a>, and were more likely to report seeking contact with people of different ethnic backgrounds in their free time (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology<\/strong><\/em><\/a>).<\/p>\n

Organizations like The Village Square are built on the \u201ccontact hypothesis\u201d \u2014 the idea that positive interpersonal contact between disagreeing groups is vital to reducing prejudice. A similar body, American Public Square, now operates in Kansas City, Missouri. Its dinners feature live fact-checking of attendees\u2019 claims by staff from a university library, and people are given \u201ccivility bells\u201d to ring if they think the conversation is turning too hostile. It\u2019s slow going, but \u201cthe process is the product,\u201d says founder Allan Katz, who also co-founded The Village Square. \u201cYou\u2019re hoping to raise the consciousness of a community, which also puts pressure on your elected officials and lawmakers to behave civilly.\u201d<\/p>\n

In Cambridge, Massachusetts, Jessica Weaver and colleagues at a group called Essential Partners quietly held meetings between pro-choice and anti-abortion community representatives for several years, following shootings at a local abortion clinic. Borrowing from the strategies of family therapists, a major part of their process is to prepare people for this dialogue.<\/p>\n

Facilitators interview those involved beforehand, to get a better grasp of their perspectives and goals, and the potential pitfalls to avoid. During the meetings, they try to make participants reflect more carefully on what they say: by scheduling pauses to encourage people to listen and collect their thoughts, for example, or by encouraging questions centered on their feelings and experiences, rather than on their positions. Suggested questions, for example, include \u201cWhat life experiences may have shaped your current views about abortion?\u201d and \u201cHave you ever felt stereotyped by those who hold different views on this issue?\u201d<\/p>\n

Since then, the group has applied the same methods to conversations about gun control in Butte, Montana; immigration in New Hampshire; and religion in Nigeria. Representatives are next headed to North Carolina, where they\u2019ll moderate meetings between the Black Lives Matter<\/strong><\/a> movement and the police.<\/p>\n

\u201cIs it frustrating? Yes. Is it hard? Of course,\u201d says Weaver. \u201cBut I think those conversations across the table are ultimately what gives us a sense of what\u2019s possible at a larger scale.\u201d<\/p>\n

The hope is that such methods will hit home, from large communities down to individuals. \u201cIf one side thinks more and the other side listens more, then you\u2019d be in a much better place than you are,\u201d says Nick. \u201cPolitics is not the hard part of the relationship.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Smart Investing,<\/p>\n

David Dittman
\nEditorial Director, Wall Street Daily<\/i><\/p>\n

The post Presidential Election: The Science of Polls<\/a> appeared first on Wall Street Daily<\/a>.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By WallStreetDaily.com Hard as it may be to believe, public opinion polling is actually grounded in science. Sure, vagaries of statistical analysis create meaningful \u2014 and exploitable \u2014 gaps. But let\u2019s not let demagogues feed our paranoia. Today is the first day of the next four years of American political life. It\u2019s been a messy […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-97878","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","no-post-thumbnail"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/97878","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=97878"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/97878\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":97894,"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/97878\/revisions\/97894"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=97878"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=97878"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=97878"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}