Polls can’t predict – but they can warn. And I’m not sure our horserace-obsessed media are heeding the warning
…
One of the things these numbers suggest is that the journalists are not getting the truth across to citizens on some key points (or if they are, that truth is being ignored).
The poll respondents claim that one of their big concerns is the economy. If that’s the case, they should be happy with Biden. Among the factors: low inflation, significant growth and low unemployment. Paul Krugman, the Nobel laureate economist, wrote recently: “The economic news in 2023 was almost miraculously good.” (Even the cost of a classic Thanksgiving dinner, he notes, was down 4.5% last year.)
If the economy is that strong and that important to voters – and if Biden can take at least some of the credit – why isn’t it coming across? That’s something for the Biden campaign, primarily; but it’s also something for media people since journalists are supposed to be communicating information so that citizens can vote with knowledge. That should be a higher priority than generating profits, ratings and clicks, but one eventually despairs that it ever will be.
Another major voter concern, of course, is Biden’s age. He’s 81; Trump will be 78 in June. They’re both old; both have memory gaps and both exhibit confusion at times.
Only one of them, however, talks about some migrants as “animals” or predicts a “bloodbath” for the country if he loses. Only one is facing dozens of charges related to crimes including trying to overturn a legitimate election. Only one has promised to be a dictator on day one of his presidency and only one has allies that are meticulously plotting a radical revamping of how America works.
The press has learned that “engagement” is the only way for them to survive. The problem is that they are generating a false narrative to attract more viewers. Basically, it’s become clickbait. They refuse to show all the information because then voters would see it and stop viewing them daily.
Bruh. Do you even know who wrote this article?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sullivan_(journalist)
Like, she was the public editor of the NY Times during that election…
And this whole article is about how she still doesn’t even know the basics of polling like margin of error.
If you were surprised Hillary lost in 2016, the only journalists you should be mad at is ones like this author who just kept telling everyone Clinton was a sure thing and Trump couldn’t possibly win
Which is the same situation this election with Biden, except his numbers are even worse
Being surprised Clinton lost in 2016 is fine; she was the favourite to win. That’s just different from it being a sure thing, which this author doesn’t seem to understand.
…
The numbers had her winning a few states by like 2-3%, with 5% margins of error a month out from the election.
If someone was surprised she lost those states after going to California of all states for a victory lap while trump campaigned in those close ones…
Then we should not listen to their advice after telling us they still don’t understand statistics.
This isn’t just some random person, she is a famous journalist with a nationwide platform who seems to think ignorance and zero standards is the best path forward.
The fact that she supports democrats over republicans makes this more concerning, not less.
If the only two options are both like this, it won’t be long till we have no options.