Opinion Polls in Us Politics: Understanding Their Role in Elections - Research Paper

Introduction

The opinion polls have existed in US politics for decades. Today, opinion polls are well established and have become part of the media coverage during election campaigns. Although the election polls have demonstrated an attraction of a great deal of attention regarding their ability to predict the outcome of the elections, most of their most important functions in the United States has been to help the journalists as well as citizens to understand the meaning of campaigns as well as the overall election. Polls are imperative in US elections as they tend to explain the important issues in an election, the qualities of the candidates and how it can influence the decisions of the voters, and the amount of public support for a particular policy change. People believe that opinion polls help to understand how the voters are reacting towards certain political parties or candidates. However, there have been controversies on the relevance and role of the opinion polls in US elections. Some people argue that public opinion hinders democracy because they influence voters' behavior. In contrast, others see public opinion polls as a source of information on how the public views the election candidates. Despite the differences in opinions, public opinion polls negatively impact US elections by influencing voter's behavior, which undermines democracy.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The bandwagon effect is a sociobiological theory, which argues that a person associated with a particular social group will tend to decide the same way as the rest of the group. During U.S. elections, the bandwagon effect is easily observed. The public opinion polls tend to influence voters' decisions to vote, just like the way the polls are displayed. For instance, voters tend to support a party or candidates with a significant rise in the polls. The bandwagon effect has been a disturbing issue in the United States, with evidence showing that polls are used by some of the politicians to shape public opinion. It has been demonstrated that if the opinion polls indicate that a particular candidate is going to win, then a lot of voters, especially the ones who are undecided tend to vote for the candidate. Additionally, there is evidence that voters of the losing candidate in public opinion are likely to avoid the voting process as they feel their votes may not count after all. In such cases, it can be argued that public opinion polls may not be a true representative of the actual political atmosphere but may end up influencing the final tally, which is a negative implication on the entire process that should be democratic.

Public apathy has become a serious issue in many elections across the globe, and particularly the United States, where less than 50% of the registered voters turn up to vote. Some of these consequences may be as a result of the public opinion polls. Many of the potential voters who see their chosen candidate about to lose they tend to be dissuaded from voting due to the feeling that their candidate may not matter after all. Researchers have been concerned with the bandwagon effect and how they influence various issues like trends on-trend and popular fads, but most importantly, how they shape an election. According to the studies, many voters tend to prefer not to make an informed choice before they vote, while simply choosing to mimic the behavior of the other voters. This effect can further be explained by the theory of social impact by Bibb Latane, a psychologist who argued that attitudes, as well as behaviors, are influenced by how individuals view other people. In this respect, if a candidate is viewed as having huge support, he or she is likely to be positively viewed and is likely to get a lot more of the uncommitted voters.

Public opinion polls can either motivate or demobilizes the voters and thus affecting the voter turnout. Voters believe that polls provide a real reflection of what is going to happen in an actual election. As such, voters whose parties are declining in polls are likely not to turn out in an election, while voters whose parties are rising in polls tend to turn out in large numbers. There has been a challenge regarding the consequences of opinion polls, especially with the issue of allied voters and the floating voters. To a larger extent, the uncertainty that is noted regarding the level of disagreement is caused by the floating voters. These are the types of voters who typically decide the person to vote for in a case by case basis, which is mostly shortly before an election. However, these votes can have a significant role to play in an election, depending on how election campaigns are launched and carried out. However, these groups of people have turned out to be the main reason why pollsters conduct a public opinion poll. It has been established that the interaction of the pollsters can significantly influence their decision to vote. In some cases, the opinion polls are likely to make the floaters vote in a similar manner or abandon voting altogether. Therefore, it is evident that voting is significantly influenced by the pollsters, which can lead to a low voter turnout in case the voters are not convinced.

The change in voter turn out in the election due to the public opinion polls has massive ramifications in social welfare. For example, it has been established that a change in the turn out as a result of the information polls impacts the aggregate costs for voting. In case of an election, a higher turn out in an election is a positive thing as it decreases welfare since it increases the costs. Besides, such a situation has been noted to indirectly affect welfare by altering the chances of the majority preferred candidate. Whether the change is a positive thing or a negative thing depends significantly on how the public opinion polls influence the decision of the voters to vote. For example, if the responses to the polls are independent of the preferences of the voters, then there is a higher turn out that increases the chances of the majority, thereby increasing the expected aggregate benefits. However, it has been noted that such independence is not obvious. Polls tend to have a change in the relative turn out between the two support groups while favoring the minority while decreasing the majority's chances due to the more substantial free-riding incentives in that particular group. As such, although it is not clear how the opinion polls impact the overall welfare, they can ultimately increase or decrease social welfare, which is a negative consequence of an election.

The media coverage of public opinion polls has created a platform for competition between parties or candidates. As such, political parties or candidates are usually engaged in battle with their opponents. The strategies used during the polls battle is using offensive language, framing, and creating conflict between voters. This creates a level of mistrust from the voters towards specific candidates or political parties, thus influencing their voting behavior. The case of Iowa caucuses illustrated the mistrust and was even noted to take some of the last morsels of trust among the Americans in the political system. In the United States, opinion polls have demonstrated that there could be a problem in the voting system in the country, which aggregates the challenges regarding the belief in the election. Even before the caucuses, it was noted that more than 40% of the Americans showed that they did not have faith in the elections in November, with the main concern being the security of the elections. Another 45% felt that not all of the votes were going to be counted. Additionally, studies have been conducted to illustrate how Trump's campaign demonstrates the rhetoric that elites shape public opinion through public opinion polls. Therefore, the opinion polls can be seen to compromise democracy in the United States, which is an adverse ramification in a country that has always fostered a great deal of democracy.

Polling in the United States has demonstrated to be at the heart of the horserace coverage. Just like the announcer at the racetrack, the media just calls the move of every candidate through the presidential campaign. It should be noted that the horserace coverage can be positive, negative, or neutral depending on various factors, especially how the polls of the facts are covered. In 2012 during the presidential election, the Pew Research Center established that Mitt Romney and Barrack Obama received a lot of negative horserace coverages than the positive ones. In the study, it was established that Mitt Romney received more of the negative coverages, especially towards the polls. As such, many of the potential voters of the candidate may have been influenced and failed to turn out and vote, which may have impacted on the final tally. Besides, the horserace coverage has been widely criticized due to a lack of depth. In many cases, the stories tend to skip over the candidates' issue positions, among many other facts that can help the voters to make a wise and informed decision. However, the horserace coverage has remained popular as it is mostly concerned with who will win the election. With about a third or more of the news content and stories concentrating on this, the problems are adverse, and the consequences are dire.

Despite the pessimistic arguments regarding the negative implications of opinion polls on the elections in the United States, some scholars have illustrated that public opinion polls enable an understanding of the critical election issues. One of the advantages that have been illustrated regarding the polling process is the provision of a solid read on the candidates or the elected leaders on the pulse of the public regarding some of the critical issues. Through public opinion polls, the candidate or the leader is trapped in a particular vacuum, where they tend to be absent-minded regarding how the public feels about them, or a particular issue or an idea that should be developed in polling. Through public opinions, it has been illustrated that there is a channel for popular sovereignty, where the voice of the people within a political process is heard, even before polling can be done. As such, the divulging of the polling information tends to facilitate a larger discussion regarding how the public feels. This makes the political parties to re-strategize and develop a proper manifesto that resonates with the people, with the aim of winning the election, which is an advantage to the populace when their ideas are incorporated in government agenda.

When scientifically done, public opinion polls tend to be nonbiased, which illustrates the major feelings of the people. Through the opinion polls, the candidates tend to understand the proportion of the population that has a particular standpoint or viewpoint towards the election. Such polls do not explain why the respondents feel that way or how they can change their minds. However, with the opinion polls, the candidates and the political parties can dig deeper and investigate why the population feels that way. The people who feel that opinion polls are good for democracy to argue that they facilitate fairness, as in most cases, the polls tend to reflect the major feels and predict the outcome of the election. In addition to this, opinion polls can have many benefits to the candidates who seek to raise campaign money. Since 1976, the presidential campaigns in the United States have been financed publicly. As such, the opinion poll shapes the means of raising money, considering that candidates favored by the polls get more funding, which enables them to sell their manifesto better.

Despite the arguments of pro opinion polls in assisting the candidates in strategizing effective in the polls, the argument...