Language matters

The people whose livelihoods depend on them (not just politicians but marketers) pay a certain amount of attention to them, and spend a lot of money on them.

I know. They would never want to admit that there could be problems with them. But consider how much the people who are taking the polls are getting paid (I don't know how much but I can't imagine they're making a killing) as to how inspired they are to work hard on it, combined with basic human nature. Not to mention the fact that just answering the poll might cause people to change their minds about the answer they gave. Or there could be some other reason that they change their minds. Thus negating their answer. (along with the other issues I mentioned)

I don't think I get that, sasha. People who want to make money selling soap 9etc) use polls to help determine how to sell it. They have no interest in throwing money away. Neither do the politicians who use polls. The fact both continue to pay money for them suggests that they think they work, at least better than any alternative.

Changing minds after the poll doesn't negate the poll. The poll is intended to determine how people are thinking at the time the poll is taken, not how they will think later on.

There is a little number called a push poll that is becoming unfortunately more common. It is ostensibly a poll, but it's really designed to influence your opinion. They are pretty easy to spot if you understand them. They go something like this:

[A few innocuous general questions]
Which of these do you think is the most important issue today in our city: crime, traffic, economy?
Are you in favor of building a new city hall?

[Now,closing in]
Who do you favor in the upcoming election for mayor--Joe Blow or Mary Smith?
Who do you favor in the upcoming election for dogcatcher--John Doe or Richard Roe?

[If you like Richard]
Were you aware that Richard Roe has donated money to hunting organizations?
Were you aware that Richard Roe has been accused of kicking puppies?
A recent report has equated donating money to hunting organizations with being a child molester. John Doe is on record as hating hunting.

[the finale]
Now that you know this, is your option of Richard Roe more or less favorable?

Sorry, sasha, but you're missing out if you dismiss all polls offhand.

Of course there are push polls, and fraudulent polls, and misleading polls, and polls with an enormous error margin. But that doesn't diminish the fact that some polls are well designed and well executed, and capable of delivering valid (and sometimes valuable) information.

Ahh, I rest my case!

When I was in school, our political science professor told us about one of the worst-designed polls ever. If I remember it correctly, the Saturday Review of Literature conducted a telephone poll of its subscribers in order to predict the results of a presidential election. The poll results predicted an easy victory for the Republican candidate, but in fact it was the Democrat who won the election. His name: Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

Many Americans did not have telephones at the time, so the poll was faulty in contacting only the fairly well-to-do, most of whom were vehemently opposed to any candidate put forward by the Democratic Party.

IN 1936, the Literary Digest predicted that Landon would beat Roosevelt. The poll was flawed for two reason. First, the poll was sent to people who subscribed to the magazine, who had phones, or who had registered cars--those people were likely to be more affluent. That was not a statistical sample of likely voters.

Second, response was voluntary. As it turned out, people who hated Roosevelt were more likely to respond.

If I recall correctly, George Gallup was just getting started in 1936 and called the election correctly, knowing how to conduct a random survey.

I'm working from memory and would be glad to be corrected by anyone who cares to google it, or who has a better memory.

Got me but I'm sure George has rolled over in his grave on many an occasion.