The article examines the history of polling in U.S. elections, starting with Literary Digest's inaccurate 1936 prediction of Alf Landon's victory over Franklin Delano Roosevelt. It outlines key polling errors over the decades, including the Chicago Daily Tribune's 1948 mistake and the miscalculations in recent elections. Despite advancements in polling methods, challenges remain, such as low response rates and human biases in data interpretation. The piece concludes that polls are more reliable as snapshots of opinion rather than predictors of actual voting behavior.
Key facts
- Literary Digest incorrectly predicted the 1936 election outcome.
- Gallup began tracking presidential approval ratings in 1938.
- Polling errors occurred in the 2004, 2012, and 2016 elections.
- Recent partisan polls overstated progressive support in primaries.
- Polling is more accurate as a snapshot of opinion than a predictor of behavior.
A short AI summary in our own words. The reporting belongs to Fox News — Latest; we don't reproduce it.