Friday, October 23, 2015

Political Polling is a Waste of Time

            Currently there is a presidential election going on.  Election Day is more than 1 year from now, but already millions of dollars have been raised and everything is underway.  Everyday there are new polls tracking what candidates are “favored”, “leading”, or “detested”.  I would like to explain to you why those things are completely pointless and are making you dumber.
            People only have so much room in their minds, they allow themselves to forget details all the time, phone numbers, names, dates, and even things that were deeply affecting to others or of global importance fade in people’s minds.  This is less than ideal, but also understandable.  You cannot know everything and since you have a role to play in society you must know certain things and other facts must be sacrificed for this knowledge.
            Sadly, there is a side effect to this.  People must know certain things.  And since the things they remember most clearly tend to be very important to them, say the face of a loved one, a deeply affecting story, or the launch codes, people start to make a logical fallacy.  That fallacy is:

“I remember it” = “Important”

            This has always been true of course, it is why advertising is a thing.  Using novelty and trickery to have a product stand out in the minds of people means they will conflate that product with importance.  Hence why “Just Do It” evokes Nike in the minds of anyone who watches sports regularly or who has played sports for any period of time.  Or why “Apply Directly to the Forehead” makes you think of charlatans who are trying to cure your headaches with a giant tube of Chap Stick (this is a thing).
            Why am I talking about this?
 
This is why.
            Donald Trump has spent his entire adult life trying to will himself into importance.  He has plastered his names onto giant buildings, casinos, golf courses, and TV shows.  He has done his damnedest to make sure you know who the hell he is.  And whether you know WHO he is… That is not important, what is important is that you remember the name.  And remember:

“I remember it” = “Important”

            Donald Trump has built his entire professional career out of this concept.  He is the loudest, therefore you listen.  He is the most known, therefore he is the most important.
            The obvious retort to this is, “What about Jeb!”  Actually that wouldn’t be much of a retort, because the Bush family (of which he is a part) is important.  They are exceptionally wealthy political carpet-baggers who have been governors and presidents, and who are friends with numerous diplomats and political king makers.  You don’t necessarily know Jeb, but your brain remembers “Bush”.  And as we have established:

“I remember it” = “Important”

            And that (along with millions and millions of dollars) is why TRUMP and BUSH were the initial front runners.  But, in more recent time others have begun jockeying for position and this is when you point to the current “frontrunner” (after TRUMP) is Doctor Ben Carson.
            Carson was previously unknown so why the hell would people remember him?  I think you already kind of know the answer but you feel bad for knowing it.  Here is a hint.  In the picture below, can you pick out who Carson is thru the blur?
 
Try and identify all 10.  I can't now and I am the one who blurred the photo.
            He is the only black candidate running for the Republican nomination.  That means that people will be able to google the phrase “black GOP candidate” and get him.  Only one other candidate, Carly Fiorina has that kind of advantage (andhere numbers go up significantly shortly after each debate once people have had time to digest who each of these candidates are).  But Carson is also the only medical doctor running (unless I missed someone) giving him another slight advantage when it comes to being remembered.

“I remember it” = “Important”

            Now is the time you can point to Senator Rubio and Governor Jindal and say, “Your theory doesn’t hold up because these two minority candidates are not doing well, and they are somewhat known for having given speeches in rebuttal to President Obama’s State of the Union addresses.  Surely they would have enough going for them.”  And then follow it up with, “And besides, BUSH, is no longer near the lead, his star fell pretty far, how do you explain that?”
            Here is how I answer that, because all three of them are now being remembered for sucking.  BUSH is not well liked, people voted for him initially because he was the only name they knew (aside from TRUMP) and so they said, “Yeah, sure, I guess I would go with him, at least I know who he is.”
This is the most memorable thing I know about him.  And I am from Florida.
Hell, I would bet most people don't even know he is a Florida Senator.
Jindal and Rubio are both known for giving rebuttals to the president, but they did a bad job of it, also they are massive hypocrites on the topic of immigration, and why they are focusing on that topic bewilders me because all the crazy jingoistic people are already voting for TRUMP, and since they are the least educated people out there they are the ones most likely to just pick the big name and stick with it because they don’t want to have to learn a bunch of other names, they have already made room in their memories for remembering Donald.

“I remember it” = “Important”

            And I know lots of people are already writing me off when I write this.  I am ignoring issues for the most part, having only mentioned when talking about Jindal and Rubio.  My points might also come off as racist and elitist because I am painting the GOP as unable to remember more than a couple names and overly fixated on race.  I am also not talking about the Democratic primary which currently only has 5 people running (I would like to point out that the dominating front runners are a woman that shares a name with a previous president, and a Jewish man who cursesin political debates, making them somewhat more memorable).  Those are all fair criticisms, but the reason I wrote this was to point out the real problem.  These polls are god awful.
            Political polls that ask you about people fall victim to this huge problem.

“I remember it” = “Important”

            No one asked, “Who do you think you will vote for?” is being asked, “What do you care about?” or “How do you feel about the economy?” and they have ZERO ability to ask for nuanced questions that require nuanced answers, “How do you feel about recent peace talks with Iran, and why do you feel that way?”
            Instead, these polls tell people, “This guy is popular” and herd mentality starts to cause a snowball effect.  “This person is popular, I should remember them.”

"I think their bias is towards sensationalism and laziness.  I wouldn't say it's towards a liberal agenda.  It's light fluff so it's absolutely within the wheel house."

“I remember it” = “Important”

            And the failings of these sorts of polls rests squarely on the news.  They want names to be important because names create a narrative, an unfolding drama that can be played out and serve as a reflection of the highly nebulous “mood of the nation”.  Rather than asking the nation about the nation’s mood, and then talking about how each of the candidates might address the concerns.
            It is the job of the media to gather information not on how people are metabolizing names, but how people are living their lives and to talk about how political parties can make people’s lives better.  To debate ideas and ask candidates to explain their ideas.  Instead they are asking people about names, and people can only remember so many names, so the people with the biggest names get remembered.


“I remember it” = “Important”

I have no idea who the guy on the bottom middle is.
______________________________
If you like or hate this please take the time to comment, +1, share on Twitter or Facebook, and otherwise distribute my opinion to the world.  I would appreciate it.

1 comment: