Close Presidential race leads to questions over polling accuracy, SMU professor weighs in
As the presidential race reaches a climactic point, the nation turns its eyes to the latest polls, which indicate the contest is at a stalemate. Doubts over the reliability of these polls have sparked a conversation that was addressed on Houston's Morning Show with the insights of Matthew Wilson, a political science professor from Southern Methodist University.
Wilson discussed the historical accuracy of polling, stating that when considering an average of polls, they tend to reliably predict the outcome within a 2 or 3 percentage point margin. "In most elections, that level of accuracy would suffice," Wilson remarked, "but in an environment where the electorate is so evenly split, even a small margin can determine the winner."
The question of methodology also came into play. Polling has become increasingly difficult due to evolving technology and changing communication habits. Response rates have plummeted, with people being less likely to answer calls from unknown numbers. "Response rates are down to about 3 to 5 percent, raising concerns about whether the few who respond are truly representative of the population," Wilson explained.
To address these challenges, some pollsters have turned to internet polling, using panels reflective of the nation's demographic and political diversity. Nonetheless, Wilson emphasized that none of these methods are without flaws.
Get news, weather and so much more on the new FOX LOCAL app
Wilson also touched upon the potential influence polls could have on voters, suggesting that blowout predictions could suppress turnout, whereas close race forecasts might incentivize more voters to cast ballots. "If quality surveys indicate a tight race, we should expect enhanced voter turnout," he said, implying that this election cycle will likely see robust participation at the polls.