One Less Myth
Poll numbers are often used to "prove" whatever is being defended.
Let's look at how we can understand the polls being used by looking at a specific claim as an example.
The claim is often made that the majority of Americans support Universal Healthcare.
It is often levied as proof that politicians just don't care about what the public wants.
So, is that true?
One 2020 national poll is often used to justify the idea that 63% support Universal Healthcare.
But in reality it says that ~36% support a single-payer system, and another ~26% support a public option. Combined those two show 63% support for increased government involvement. That's obviously different!
Is this a non-partisan, well-known polling group, like Pew Research? Or is this poll funded by a partisan think tank or advocacy group?
Being funded by a partisan group doesn't mean the results are incorrect, but our confidence in them should be much lower.
There is often a disconnect between the opinion of the general public, and the opinion of active voters. Pay attention to whether polls use active voters.
Most polls that show support for Universal Healthcare in the US are not polling voters.
Also pay attention to regions polled and sample sizes. If only major cities are polled for instance, or only a few states, then the results might be skewed.
When being funded by partisan groups, it's not unusual to see those polls use leading questions to get the results they want.
But even beyond that we need to look at the questions to see how specific they were.
Is it asking about the general idea of Universal Healthcare, or about a specific proposal?
People are far more likely to support general ideas, but balk at the details of an actual proposal. This is especially true on major policy proposals. Poorly implemented policies have a devastating impacts on lives.
We saw that in the 2020 presidential primary. All the candidates who supported Universal Healthcare got less than 35% of the total votes combined.
There are a lot of things voters want. But there are few things that motivate them to switch from voting for their default party. We see this every voting cycle.
Republican voters in poorer regions consistently vote in politicians that financially harm them. They are motivated by the issues their religious leaders rally them on, like abortion.
An issue like Universal Healthcare has not yet become a key voting issue. Neither has legalizing drugs, or many other important issues. Fear is a very motivating factor, as are religious beliefs. Uniting people around positive ideas is much harder.
It is often the case that the supporters of a politician do not align with the average of voters across the country. Some areas are far more liberal, and some far more conservative.
Politicians know that voting for things voters don't support could result in them losing their next election.
If they believe staying elected will allow them to do more good (in other areas), then they will support only the changes their voters support. This is how representative democracies work.
There are of course other issues that come into play, like gerrymandering. That is a separate challenge though.
Savvy politicians rely on experts who understand, what polls are actually supporting.
Take the 2020 election, where Biden's healthcare proposal was what voters said they wanted. That was a public option.
Polls can be manipulated to tell us what we want to hear. They can ask a non-representative group about abstract ideas, and give us a poor impression of what motivates voters in the voting booth.
Citizens have the luxury of adhering to ideologies. Effective politicians are pragmatic. They support changes that will improve lives. And they represent the best balance between what their constituents want, and what they need.