Ignoring bad polling numbers isn’t going to win the election.
There’s a lot of stupidity running around in politics these days. But one of the most idiotic claims out there is that crowd size at rallies is more indicative of a candidate’s level of support than polls.
Fox News host Eric Bolling is the latest to take this approach to poll denialism: “Here’s why polls really shouldn’t matter or shouldn’t ever matter. You pick up the phone and you say, ‘Who are you going to vote for?’ That person on the other end of the phone says, ‘Well, I’m going to vote for Hillary Clinton.’ They’re not out there voting. The people who are getting out in the street and going to a rally, those are people who get up off the couch and go hear something, go say something.” (Scroll forward to about 5:47 in the video to see this.)
Well, yes, it’s true that the people on the phones aren’t out there voting, but neither are the people going to rallies. Why? Because it’s not Election Day yet. The earliest of early voting hasn’t even started.
People who go to rallies are more involved in politics and more motivated by a particular candidate’s message. They are probably more likely to vote than those staying at home on the couch, but many of those on the couch actually will get up to vote. Voting is generally a much less burdensome method of participating in politics than attending a campaign rally.
But more to Bolling’s point, rallies couldn’t possibly be more indicative of vote preference than polls. In a 2012 survey from Pew Research, 10 percent of Americans reported having attended a political rally or speech. Compare that to 58.6 percent of eligible Americans who voted in that year’s presidential election. Way more people will vote than attend rallies.
Pollsters talk to both enthusiastic rally-goers and couch potatoes because they try to achieve a representative sample ― meaning they try to interview a cross-section of Americans that roughly matches the demographics of the American population. Then they use vote history, ask questions of the respondents or use some combination of those techniques to determine who is most likely to vote. These are the “likely voters” that you hear about.
Trump, his campaign and surrogates would be wise to believe the polls when all of them say he’s down. Denial doesn’t win elections.
Dear Trump Supporters: Crowd Size Doesn’t Mean Anything
Crowd size at rallies may feed Trump's ego - but they aren't a reliable indicator of who will actually turn out to vote for him on Election Day. Hillary is leading in all the polls that I'm aware of.
There’s a lot of stupidity running around in politics these days. But one of the most idiotic claims out there is that crowd size at rallies is more indicative of a candidate’s level of support than polls.
Fox News host Eric Bolling is the latest to take this approach to poll denialism: “Here’s why polls really shouldn’t matter or shouldn’t ever matter. You pick up the phone and you say, ‘Who are you going to vote for?’ That person on the other end of the phone says, ‘Well, I’m going to vote for Hillary Clinton.’ They’re not out there voting. The people who are getting out in the street and going to a rally, those are people who get up off the couch and go hear something, go say something.” (Scroll forward to about 5:47 in the video to see this.)
Well, yes, it’s true that the people on the phones aren’t out there voting, but neither are the people going to rallies. Why? Because it’s not Election Day yet. The earliest of early voting hasn’t even started.
People who go to rallies are more involved in politics and more motivated by a particular candidate’s message. They are probably more likely to vote than those staying at home on the couch, but many of those on the couch actually will get up to vote. Voting is generally a much less burdensome method of participating in politics than attending a campaign rally.
But more to Bolling’s point, rallies couldn’t possibly be more indicative of vote preference than polls. In a 2012 survey from Pew Research, 10 percent of Americans reported having attended a political rally or speech. Compare that to 58.6 percent of eligible Americans who voted in that year’s presidential election. Way more people will vote than attend rallies.
Pollsters talk to both enthusiastic rally-goers and couch potatoes because they try to achieve a representative sample ― meaning they try to interview a cross-section of Americans that roughly matches the demographics of the American population. Then they use vote history, ask questions of the respondents or use some combination of those techniques to determine who is most likely to vote. These are the “likely voters” that you hear about.
"Since 1952 no candidate who is ahead in the polls 2 weeks after the conventions has lost the election."
Trump, his campaign and surrogates would be wise to believe the polls when all of them say he’s down. Denial doesn’t win elections.
Dear Trump Supporters: Crowd Size Doesn’t Mean Anything
Crowd size at rallies may feed Trump's ego - but they aren't a reliable indicator of who will actually turn out to vote for him on Election Day. Hillary is leading in all the polls that I'm aware of.
