# Should we end polling? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 26, 2016, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-end-polling/769801 "2016-10-26T20:06:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 5:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-end-polling/769801/21 "2016-10-27T05:48:23Z")
> [@Vicsage](#): > > Not saying we outlaw polls, which would be unconstitutional, I’m saying people should lie to pollsters, which they have the right to do. Can you explain how you plan to organize that? ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 7:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-end-polling/769801/22 "2016-10-27T07:10:15Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Can you explain how you plan to organize that? The same way they plan to legalize marijuana via jury nullification, one assumes. ---
**Author:** ![marshmallow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 11:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-end-polling/769801/23 "2016-10-27T11:37:43Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > That’s right, because the whole basis of democracy is that what people believe is worthless. :rolleyes: [Correct. (PDF)](https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf) > [@](#): > > When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the U.S. political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it. What the American population thinks is interesting trivia that can be spun into more effective PR, but not by itself terribly important. Ending polls won’t change any of this. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 11:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-end-polling/769801/24 "2016-10-27T11:50:15Z")
> [@Daylate](#): > > You are very close to the thinking of H.L. Mencken (about 90 years ago). > > Mencken wrote that “An honest politician is one who, when he’s bought, stays bought.”. My favorite: “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” ---
**Author:** ![Lightray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lightray/32/391_2.png) [@Lightray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lightray)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-end-polling/769801/25 "2016-10-27T14:03:06Z")
> [@Vicsage](#): > > Never said what people believe is worthless. Because of polls, what politicians say is worthless. I will write without pronouns to avoid confusion. Politicians say what the people believe, but not what the politician believes. So the politician lies about what the politician is going to do, just to get the votes of the people. The politician doesn’t care what the people want, the politician is going to vote the politician’s agenda. If the politician had no clue (polls) to what the people believed, the politician is more likely to state his beliefs, since most politicians truly think their beliefs are mainstream, even if they are not. I would rather know what the politician believes, than have him know what I believe. The politician will not do what I or the people want if the politician disagrees. (I know I used the pronoun I, but to use my name sounded too Bob Dole-like). My God, this is a terrible string of wild-ass assumptions that you’re presenting as facts. If a politician is penalized by stating a belief that is not mainstream, and has no way of knowing if a belief is mainstream or not, then _they won’t state their beliefs AT ALL_. Or, the politician will state a belief, and then wildly deny that he ever said such a thing when he learns that the public disapproves of what he said. ---
**Author:** ![TroutMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troutman/32/6721_2.png) [@TroutMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TroutMan)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-end-polling/769801/26 "2016-10-27T14:04:14Z")
> [@Vicsage](#): > > An example of a candidate using a poll. The TPP Is opposed by the majority of people(Caldwell and Associate poll) and a strong argument could be made that Hillary has always been a strong supporter of trade deals and that she has modified her stance on this one, due to polling numbers and also to get Warren on her side. If the polls had shown a favorable view by the populace, you can bet she’d be pushing for it. If polling was not an issue, she’d be more likely to state her real opinion on the TPP. Politicians do change positions, and hopefully this is done at times to match what their constituents want. For all you know, Hillary will continue to oppose TPP after the election. I was asking for an example where a politician chose a side based on a poll, was elected because of it, then voted opposite their stated position. You seem to think this is a significant problem, so surely there must be examples. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-end-polling/769801/27 "2016-10-27T14:07:06Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > Politicians represent _us_. Of course, not very well, but they sure aren’t going to be able to represent us _better_ by knowing _less_ about what we believe. Exactly. How is representative government supposed to work if our representatives don’t know what we want? Lying to politicians makes as little sense as lying to your waitress when she asks you what you’d like to order. ---
**Author:** ![Daylate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9dc877/32.png) [@Daylate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Daylate)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-end-polling/769801/28 "2016-10-27T16:29:59Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally Posted by Daylate > You are very close to the thinking of H.L. Mencken (about 90 years ago). > > Mencken wrote that “An honest politician is one who, when he’s bought, stays bought.”. > > My favorite: “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” > ] IMHO, that guy Mencken was one smart dude. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-end-polling/769801/29 "2016-10-27T17:56:00Z")
> [@Vicsage](#): > > Never said what people believe is worthless. Because of polls, what politicians say is worthless. I will write without pronouns to avoid confusion. Politicians say what the people believe, but not what the politician believes. So the politician lies about what the politician is going to do, just to get the votes of the people. The politician doesn’t care what the people want, the politician is going to vote the politician’s agenda. If the politician had no clue (polls) to what the people believed, the politician is more likely to state his beliefs, since most politicians truly think their beliefs are mainstream, even if they are not. I would rather know what the politician believes, than have him know what I believe. The politician will not do what I or the people want if the politician disagrees. (I know I used the pronoun I, but to use my name sounded too Bob Dole-like). First, if I really think the MW should be raised, why should I say otherwise? If politicians did not listen to polls, they would be listening to lobbyists. Is that better in your book? Second, politicians don’t spring out of the sea like Venus Aphrodite. When a party selects a candidate, why not someone who shares beliefs with the people. Now in some cases the people are an ass, and a good politician will have to lead, since the obvious answer may be wrong. Finally, if politicians only followed the polls they’d all be saying the same thing, which they don’t. So your premise is not even correct. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-end-polling/769801/30 "2016-10-27T17:57:36Z")
> [@Vicsage](#): > > Are polling results causing more harm than good? Would we be better off if people lied to pollsters, People already do. Lots. ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2016, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-end-polling/769801/31 "2016-10-31T18:00:31Z")
> [@Vicsage](#): > > A pollster can’t tell if someone is lying. Assertion not in evidence. You can indeed tell if someone is lying by asking them variations on questions and seeing if they are consistent. Which is basically the same way that lawyers and police determine if someone is lying. Polling organizations have big databases of the information they get, and can do that kind of analysis. This would increase the cost of polling, and increase the error, but it would not make it useless. It’s pretty unlikely that individuals attempting to mislead pollers could do so consistently. And… what would be the goal here? Imagine that a bunch of people decided to do this and totally fooled the pollsters. Then we’d just get more policies that we don’t support? A much more effective plan would be to personally call and write letters to your politicians asking them to do things you don’t support, since they weight personal contact much more highly than poll results. “Effective” used here in the sense of “totally stupid and counter-productive.” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-end-polling/769801.md?page=1)