Political Polls, The only Thing Certain is Uncertainty
Ken Hughes
February 26, 2008
What do political polls tell us about a candidate? They´re telling us 2,000 people or less are deciding which way the voters will decide on the candidates months before they´ve made up their minds on who to vote for. The question is do polls follow the trends or do trends follow the polls? There´s no question reporting politics is more individual bias than knowledge. There´s also no question what we´re sold in a political candidate by the Media is never what´s produced as the end result. Presidential candidates get caught up in the moment and make promises they can´t possible deliver on. Even the most astute candidates have tendencies to over-state their ambitions.
About the best that can be said for polling data is it fills air time. As far as predicting the outcome of any given function it´s always a crap shoot, at best they´ve made a 50 / 50 decision and then only being right half of the time, that doesn´t qualify as political expertise.
There are countries around the world who avoid all the hair splitting we Americans go through. Those countries only allow one candidate per position and usually a no vote or a non vote is unacceptable. There´s no question as convoluted as our election process is, it´s the fairest one to be found anywhere in the world.
The presidential election process has come a long way since the first one. There´s a story George Washington´s campaign managers put a barrel of whiskey at the front door of the polling stations, every voter who entered got a shot of whiskey on the way in, only those who voted for Washington got a second shot on the way out. The only difference is today the candidates supporters are required to stay 500 feet from the front door and rather than whiskey they´re making unreasonable promises. The process of buying votes hasn´t changed much in over 200 years.
There´s no way of predicting how a new president will perform or the decision they will be required to make after their inauguration. There´re too many variables as President Bush discovered after 9/11/01. All the things presidential candidates are saying they will do in their first days in office are strictly campaign hype. It takes more than a president´s word to change the course of government. It seem a bit presumptuous on the part of any candidate to suggest they know better what is best for the country than 535 congress persons and 300 million citizens who are all responsible for the way the country is run.
It´s normal for candidates to question their opponent´s positions but this election process is turning into a cat fight at least for Democrats. The Media has been featuring some very unflattering pictures of Hillary without blaming the Obama camp for instigating them. On the other hand anything unflattering to Obama is immediately blamed on the Clinton camp. To many of us outside observers this smells of media bias.
For as long as I can remember, that´s been over the terms of 12 previous presidents. It seems with each election process the campaigning gets more aggressive. The Public and the candidates continually complain about the way campaigns are conducted. Each blames the other for the problems. Candidates say the voters expect aggressive campaigns and the voters say they would prefer hearing the truth, somewhere in between there should be room for compromise, a little less hyperbole on the part of the candidates and fewer expectation on the part of the public would sound reasonable. My personal opinion is the public is media driven and short on commonsense.
It seems both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are making promises that can´t possibly be kept solely by a president. There are 535 congress persons who these candidates seem to be ignoring. There isn´t enough money in the treasury to pay for all these two are promising the public. People are beginning to realize the government can´t give things they haven´t taken from the public first, or by increasing the deficit. It will be interesting to see if the next president suffers the same allegations of impropriety George Bush had to endure his eight years in office.
The founding fathers made it possible for the American people to have a government of their choice. That´s truer today than ever before, political campaigns are changing from half truths and empty promises. With the communications facilities available to the voters in this modern age of communication no lie goes unchallenged. For those who are vigilant there can be no half truths, it becomes a matter of who and what we believe.
The key to casting a worthwhile vote is asking yourselves if your candidates promises sound as thought they can be fulfilled and work to your benefit or are they things you want to hear? Ask what the cost will be in money and in liberty then vote accordingly.
About the best that can be said for polling data is it fills air time. As far as predicting the outcome of any given function it´s always a crap shoot, at best they´ve made a 50 / 50 decision and then only being right half of the time, that doesn´t qualify as political expertise.
There are countries around the world who avoid all the hair splitting we Americans go through. Those countries only allow one candidate per position and usually a no vote or a non vote is unacceptable. There´s no question as convoluted as our election process is, it´s the fairest one to be found anywhere in the world.
The presidential election process has come a long way since the first one. There´s a story George Washington´s campaign managers put a barrel of whiskey at the front door of the polling stations, every voter who entered got a shot of whiskey on the way in, only those who voted for Washington got a second shot on the way out. The only difference is today the candidates supporters are required to stay 500 feet from the front door and rather than whiskey they´re making unreasonable promises. The process of buying votes hasn´t changed much in over 200 years.
There´s no way of predicting how a new president will perform or the decision they will be required to make after their inauguration. There´re too many variables as President Bush discovered after 9/11/01. All the things presidential candidates are saying they will do in their first days in office are strictly campaign hype. It takes more than a president´s word to change the course of government. It seem a bit presumptuous on the part of any candidate to suggest they know better what is best for the country than 535 congress persons and 300 million citizens who are all responsible for the way the country is run.
It´s normal for candidates to question their opponent´s positions but this election process is turning into a cat fight at least for Democrats. The Media has been featuring some very unflattering pictures of Hillary without blaming the Obama camp for instigating them. On the other hand anything unflattering to Obama is immediately blamed on the Clinton camp. To many of us outside observers this smells of media bias.
For as long as I can remember, that´s been over the terms of 12 previous presidents. It seems with each election process the campaigning gets more aggressive. The Public and the candidates continually complain about the way campaigns are conducted. Each blames the other for the problems. Candidates say the voters expect aggressive campaigns and the voters say they would prefer hearing the truth, somewhere in between there should be room for compromise, a little less hyperbole on the part of the candidates and fewer expectation on the part of the public would sound reasonable. My personal opinion is the public is media driven and short on commonsense.
It seems both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are making promises that can´t possibly be kept solely by a president. There are 535 congress persons who these candidates seem to be ignoring. There isn´t enough money in the treasury to pay for all these two are promising the public. People are beginning to realize the government can´t give things they haven´t taken from the public first, or by increasing the deficit. It will be interesting to see if the next president suffers the same allegations of impropriety George Bush had to endure his eight years in office.
The founding fathers made it possible for the American people to have a government of their choice. That´s truer today than ever before, political campaigns are changing from half truths and empty promises. With the communications facilities available to the voters in this modern age of communication no lie goes unchallenged. For those who are vigilant there can be no half truths, it becomes a matter of who and what we believe.
The key to casting a worthwhile vote is asking yourselves if your candidates promises sound as thought they can be fulfilled and work to your benefit or are they things you want to hear? Ask what the cost will be in money and in liberty then vote accordingly.
Print
Email
