State-Level Public Opinion Polls as Predictors of Presidential Election Results

1998 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-159 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey E. Cohen

Significance Sandu, the pro-EU, reformist challenger, defied public opinion polls and early results to become the principal beneficiary of a large turnout among Moldovans abroad, almost twice those voting in the first-round 2016 presidential election. As neither scored over 50%, Sandu and Dodon will contest a second round on November 15. Impacts Electoral discourse around Moldova's external orientation will become more pointed. Dodon failed to anticipate a strong showing by a pro-Western and pro-reform diaspora. Practical voter mobilisation on both sides will be complicated by the pandemic.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
KwangCheol Rim

Conventional election-related public opinion polls have utilized the automated response system (ARS) method. The ARS public opinion polls are predicated on the convenience of use and require random telephonic responses. However, the actual response rate is less than 5%. As a result, discrepancies between recent public opinion polls and the actual election results have become an issue. In this study, we propose a system that quantifies the preferences by region, age, and gender by quantifying emotions based on the behaviors and facial expressions of the citizens passing by at the campaign site and utilizes them as basic statistics. Furthermore, a previously published facial recognition artificial intelligence (AI) was used to obtain age, gender, and various facial recognition data, along with citizens’ emotions. The published facial recognition AI produced stability of over 99% recognition rate. The data structure followed a weighted reverse tree structure, and facial expressions, gender, and age were analyzed using the published facial recognition algorithm. Moreover, the expressions as well as the behaviors showing emotions were merged to gather and analyze data with weights.


1949 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 131-144
Author(s):  
Gideon Seymour ◽  
Archibald Crossley ◽  
Paul F. Lazarsfeld ◽  
George Gallup

Since the political upset last November, opinion has been divided on the question of whether pollsters should continue predicting election results. Here are the views of an editor, two poll-takers, and a communications scientist. By a vote of three to one, their answer to the question is “Yes!”


2011 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Szwed

Information about the support given by the public opinion to political actors has become a constant element of the public debate in Poland after the fall of Communism. Very soon polls became an argument in debates, a premise, or a way to justify decisions. At the same time they were criticized both by politicians and journalists convinced that polls can significantly influence the election results. But the fact was not noticed in Poland that all debates about the influence of polls on election outcomes should be preceded by a discussion of the way they are presented in the media. The present article joins this debate by subjecting to analysis the polls published in the Polish press during parliamentary campaigns in the dimensions of the role they played during the recent several years, the quality of methodological information, and of the way the polls were used in the media. As opposed to European and American analyses, no improvement in the conformity to standards of minimal disclosure in newspapers’ reporting of public opinion polls was noticed, although—like in other countries—a dramatic increase in the number of polls reported was observed.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-75
Author(s):  
Alexey Levinson

The 2018 Russian presidential election was effectively a contest not between Vladimir Putin and the other seven candidates on the ballot paper, but between Putin and the level of election turnout. Anything less than a large majority based on a respectable level of turnout would have undermined Putin’s legitimacy to serve for a further six-year term. In the event, Putin achieved his goal. Through the analysis of public opinion polls conducted by the Levada Center, we examine the background to the election. Putin’s success can be traced, first to long-standing patterns of differential turnout across the regions and, second, administrative initiatives by the election authorities which created a renewed confidence in the integrity of the election process.


1949 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 100-111
Author(s):  
William F. Swindler

The historic upset of virtually all interpretations of public opinion polls in the Presidential election in November was perhaps the most striking journalistic event of 1948. The need for intensive self-examination and technical improvements became the order of business not only for poll takers but for the whole structure of market research which had been built upon them. The fact that for the fifth consecutive Presidential election the American press had supported the candidate rejected by the electorate was also a subject of considerable discussion by laymen and practitioners. Vastly shaken public confidence, as well as the rapid development of a powerful new competitor in the form of television, pointed to a need for major reforms in editorial methods and services of newspapers—an awareness of which was somewhat manifested in the growth of regional press institutes in several additional schools of journalism.—W. F. S.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document