Introduction
As the political landscape shifts beneath our feet, polling remains a critical tool for understanding public sentiment. What if the path to more accurate voter insights lies in learning from our past experiences?
To deepen our understanding, we had a conversation with Dr. Don Levy, Director of the Siena College Research Institute, who shared valuable perspectives from his extensive experience in polling. His insights, derived from our discussion as well as his appearances on podcasts with AAPOR and WXXI News, shed light on the factors that can skew polling results.
In this blog, we’ll explore key lessons from past elections and the innovative strategies pollsters like Dr. Levy are implementing to enhance their methodologies and restore public trust.
Key Lessons from the 2016 and 2020 Elections
The polling industry has learned vital lessons that have reshaped its approach to electoral forecasting. Dr. Don Levy discusses the factors contributing to bias observed in the last two elections:
“I think we all learned a great deal from 2016, which, at this point, feels like the distant past. There was an insufficient amount of state polling during that election, and some battleground states—like Michigan, Wisconsin, and, to some degree, Pennsylvania—were not even identified as such. Additionally, some polls did not weight responses by education in that cycle. We learned from those mistakes.
By 2020, the polling landscape had changed entirely. Everyone was considering education, recognizing it as one of the key fissures in the American electorate, and there was a greater focus on several key battleground states. We were not alone in polling Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania at that point.”
Dr. Levy identifies two critical areas for improvement:
- State-Level Polling:
Many national polls failed to accurately gauge support for candidates due to an insufficient focus on state-level data. This oversight revealed how local dynamics and voter sentiment vary significantly across different regions, leading to inaccuracies in predictions. - Education as a Variable:
The impact of education on voter preferences was underestimated in many polls. Dr. Levy notes, "Education proved to be a dividing line, especially in battleground states." This insight emphasizes the importance of moving beyond traditional demographics. Pollsters must now consider how educational background influences voter behavior to enhance the accuracy of their models.
In response to these lessons, methodologies have evolved to prioritize regional polling and implement nuanced weighting practices that better represent educational backgrounds. By learning from past missteps, pollsters are striving to produce more reliable results, thereby reinforcing the credibility of polling as a tool for democratic engagement.
This recognition of education as a crucial variable, alongside the emphasis on state-level insights, marks a significant shift in voter sampling approaches. The goal now is to capture a clearer picture of public sentiment, ensuring that polling remains a trusted resource in the ever-changing political landscape.
Addressing Challenges with Innovative Approaches
In response to recent election cycles, pollsters have made significant strides to tackle key challenges. Dr. Levy highlights how these adjustments contribute to better accuracy and engagement:
- Achieving Diverse Representation Through Stratified Sampling: Pollsters use stratified sampling to ensure diverse representation across demographics, selecting sample groups that mirror the broader population—not only by age, gender, and race but also by considering regional and socioeconomic nuances. This helps create a more accurate model of voter intentions.
“We faced a bias in 2020. Our view was that ardent Trump voters—not the shy ones—tended not to respond to polls. This issue was evident across all polling methods: phone, web-based, text-to-web, and IVR. In analyzing about 50 polls from reputable AAPOR members in the ten days before the election, only three correctly predicted outcomes or leaned Republican, while nearly all others were biased the other way.
In Pennsylvania, for instance, areas with the highest Trump support showed significant polling errors. In regions where Trump won by 70% to 30%, polls often showed him at around 60% to 40%. But systemically, what occurred was that as we filled our quotas, we would just simply get a greater participation among Biden voters who were, to stereotype, white men without a college education than from a representative sample of Trump voters.
So, do we face that threat again this election? Yes. To address it, we’re implementing rigorous quota management, stratified sampling, and actively reducing drop-offs, along with the benefit of a repeat election.”
- Minimizing Drop-Offs by Leveraging Historical Data and Voter Lists: Pollsters have also become more vigilant about minimizing drop-offs, aiming to retain as many responses as possible to enhance data robustness. "Drop-offs can skew results by unintentionally filtering out certain groups," says Dr. Levy. As a solution, historical data and detailed voter lists have become valuable tools, allowing pollsters to refine their models and develop weighting strategies that are more reflective of the electorate. This approach helps account for variances in response rates, especially among underrepresented groups.
- Increasing Voter Engagement using AI and Data Enhancement: With advancements in artificial intelligence and data enhancement, pollsters now have more sophisticated tools to reach and engage voters, even as response rates remain challenging. AI-driven insights can optimize contact strategies, enabling pollsters to identify when, where, and how to engage different voter groups effectively.
These innovations collectively improve polling accuracy, reinforce public trust, and ensure that polling remains a valuable tool in capturing voter sentiment.
Upholding Integrity: The Importance of Non-Partisan Polling
In commitment to Non-Partisan Polling, maintaining public trust is paramount, and organizations like the American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) are essential in promoting transparency and upholding high standards in the polling industry. Dr. Levy highlights that these organizations work to enhance public understanding of non-partisan polling, which serves as a critical check against potential biases that can arise in politically charged environments.
“My hope—and my request—to my friends in the polling community is to broadcast to U.S. citizens and voters, explaining who we are, what we do, and why it’s important. It would be a positive act of citizenship to participate in high-quality, non-partisan political polls. We're not trying to sell you anything, convince you of anything, and/or manipulate you in any manner, shape or form.”
Pollsters are committed to contributing positively to the democratic process by fostering greater transparency around polling methods, data sources, and any limitations that may impact findings. Through collaboration and innovation, the polling industry continues to adapt and improve, addressing new challenges with integrity. As the political and social landscape evolves, the industry’s focus on high standards remains steadfast, ensuring that polling serves as an informative, unbiased reflection of public sentiment and helps advance informed democratic engagement.
Conclusion
Reflecting on the lessons of recent elections, it’s evident that the future of polling depends on how well the industry adapts and innovates. By embracing better sampling techniques and new technology, pollsters are working to paint a truer picture of where voters stand and what they care about. The path forward is one of continuous learning and evolution, ensuring that polling remains a trusted tool for understanding public sentiment.