Political Polls and their effects:

[Syntax]

So after briefly scanning wikipedia and one of the sources cited on it, I've come to the general impression that the "underdog" effect is negligible. I wanted to see if anyone here had more insight on the matter; specifically actual numbers and/or studies and/or historic examples.


Do election polls significantly change voting outcome? How good is their predictive power?

[themuzicman]

Depends on the nature of the poll. Often candidates will do 'push polls', where the question is something like "Senator Idiot is supporting a bill that would cause cataclysmic worldwide devastation. Do you agree with the Senator on this bill?"

While it's technically a question, the intent of the poll is clear.

I think those who marginally care about a particular party may be affected by polls in that if they see their guy is winning by a large margin, they may just not show up because one vote won't matter, or if their guy is a little bit behind, they might make a point because one vote could make a big difference.

But for most voters, I don't think so.

[Syntax]

Depends on the nature of the poll. Often candidates will do 'push polls', where the question is something like "Senator Idiot is supporting a bill that would cause cataclysmic worldwide devastation. Do you agree with the Senator on this bill?"

While it's technically a question, the intent of the poll is clear.

I think those who marginally care about a particular party may be affected by polls in that if they see their guy is winning by a large margin, they may just not show up because one vote won't matter, or if their guy is a little bit behind, they might make a point because one vote could make a big difference.

But for most voters, I don't think so.

Right, but I'm talking more in terms of 3rd party polling organizations like Gallup (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.).

[Crazyblue]

"Senator Idiot is supporting a bill that would cause cataclysmic worldwide devastation. Do you agree with the Senator on this bill?"

As long as nobody is left to linger, I'm fine with it.

[kepstein8888]

As long as nobody is left to linger, I'm fine with it.

I think cataclysmic worldwide devastation would be good for America. It shows that we're tough on terrorism. To quote Senator Idiot: "A dead planet is a safe planet."

[Mader]

Depends on the poll

Depends on the question Ex. 'when did you stop beating your wife', or 'how long have you supported the efforts of environmentalists to save our planet?'