No cheery time for election pollsters in run

Billy Odell Tucker-Robinson Founder & Host — Banking With Billy Network • Intelligence Network • Data Science • AI Research • World News
Published: 2026-09-22T13:31:02.726Z • Permanent link

Vigilance is required when assessing the recent performance of election pollsters. The latest round of polls conducted by companies such as Gallup and Pew Research Center has been marred by controversy and questions about their methodology. A recent study by the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), found that the accuracy of these polls had decreased significantly over the past decade. The study's lead author, Dr. Jeffrey Anderson, stated that the decline in accuracy was due to a combination of factors, including changes in polling methodology and the increasing use of online surveys.

Mistakes made by pollsters can have significant real-world consequences, particularly in the lead-up to elections. In the 2016 US presidential election, polls predicted a close contest between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, with many pundits and analysts incorrectly predicting the outcome. Trump ultimately won the election, and many pollsters were left to wonder what had gone wrong. More recently, in the 2022 midterm elections, polls predicted a landslide victory for Democrats, but the outcome was ultimately much closer than expected.

Uncertainty surrounding election polls has also led to increased skepticism among the general public. A recent survey conducted by the Pew Research Center found that 64% of Americans believed that polls were not trustworthy, up from just 44% in 2016. This increased skepticism has significant implications for researchers and analysts who rely on polls to inform their work. It also highlights the need for pollsters to be more transparent about their methodology and to be more accurate in their predictions.

Polling errors can have significant real-world consequences, particularly in the financial markets. Companies such as investment banks and asset managers rely on polls to inform their investment decisions, and inaccurate predictions can result in significant losses. A study by the investment firm, Goldman Sachs, found that polls that predicted a Democratic victory in the 2016 election were significantly more expensive than polls that predicted a Republican victory. This highlights the need for pollsters to be more accurate and reliable in their predictions.

The increasing skepticism surrounding election polls also has implications for research communities. Researchers who rely on polls to inform their work may struggle to find reliable and accurate data. This can make it difficult to draw meaningful conclusions and to inform policy decisions. For example, a study by the non-partisan research organization, Brookings Institution, found that polls were not an effective tool for predicting voter turnout in the 2022 midterm elections. This highlights the need for researchers to be more critical of polling data and to look for alternative sources of information.

The impact of polling errors on markets and policy environments is also significant. In the lead-up to elections, markets can become increasingly volatile as investors and analysts try to predict the outcome. This can lead to significant losses for investors who make incorrect predictions. For example, in the 2016 US presidential election, the Dow Jones Industrial Average plummeted by over 1,000 points in the final week of the campaign, as investors and analysts struggled to predict the outcome. This highlights the need for pollsters to be more accurate and reliable in their predictions.