Home > Blogs > Campaigns Don't Count > Archives > 2007 > December > 14 > Entry
Post’s Hillary-Barack Poll Misleads on Motives
This is not PRECISELY on topic, but it’s my blog, right?
It’s not on topic in the sense that it doesn’t fall under the rubric “Campaigns Don’t Count,” the title of the blog and the related book. But it does, at least, fall under the subtitle of the book: “How the Media Get American Politics All Wrong.”
So the Washington Post had this poll on Wednesday that says Hillary is still way ahead of Obama nationally among Democrats at 53-23 among likely voters.
Then the poll tries to analyze why:
“Clinton’s standing on attributes and issues also remains strong. She hold a 3-1 edge in being perceived as the strongest leader in the field and a nearly 6 to 1 advantage as the candidate with the best experience to be president. On the issues, she holds 2 to 1 or greater leads on four top issues: the economy, Iraq, health care and terrorism, advantages that have remained steady since last September.”
Like many media outlets, the Post presents these numbers as cause and effect. That is, people like her on attributes and issues, so they are planning to vote for her. In fact, though, the numbers are probably effect and cause. That is, people are planning to vote for her, so they say she’s right on the issues and attributes. In that case, the numbers aren’t worth looking at.
If you’re planning to vote for somebody, and a pollster approaches you with questions on the issues and attributes, you’ve got to be strongly tempted to answer those questions with a view toward justifying your vote.
But that doesn’t mean your answers explain your vote. Maybe the pollsters aren’t asking the right questions. Maybe it’s ALL about attributes for you, or all about one issue, or about gender or race or Bill Clinton. Maybe it’s some mix you can’t quite put your finger on.
Human motivation is too complex to be handled with a few poll questions. Pollsters can figure what people are planning to do. They cannot figure out why.
Suppose all the numbers change fast. Like Obama just comes on really strong in Iowa, and that affects the numbers elsewhere. Are we then supposed to believe that people suddenly changed their minds about the economy or Iraq or experience or something?
Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment | Categories: 2008 presidential race
Comments