After poll shows a 17 point swing in Donald Trump’s favor Reuters changes its polling methodology
I have written in the past that polls are not designed to determine public opinion but rather to shape public opinion. Now, if this story is true, we have could have a perfect example of this. The latest Reuters tracking poll was released yesterday and it showed a 17 point swing in favor of Donald Trump in just a two week period.
Apparently Reuters was none to happy with the results and has determined its polling methodology was skewed and has decided to change it moving forward by removing the “neither” option. Here is more:
“In a presidential campaign notable for its negativity, the option of ‘Neither’ candidate appears to be an appealing alternative, at least to participants in the Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll,” wrote Maurice Tamman, the leader of the Reuters news service’s New York City-based data mining and investigative reporting team. “Many voters on both sides have been ambivalent in their support for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and Republican nominee Donald Trump, complicating the task of the pollsters trying to track the race.”
“In the nearly five years Reuters/Ipsos has been offering the ‘Neither/Other’ option to respondents in presidential polling, it has never yielded such a skew,” he wrote. “The results highlight how poll designs and methodologies can yield significantly differing results, and how important differences can emerge from the way a question is framed.”
Reuters is spinning this change by claiming the support for Donald Trump was under reported using this methodology but it certainly looks to me as if Reuters is trying to minimize a Trump surge to make it appear as if the race was close all along, while at the same time making it appear as if Hillary Clinton’s possible demise is not so certain.
Reuters has been using the “neither” option for years and in an election cycle when more people are upset with the two candidates than ever before it seems to me as if this option is more necessary than ever before and yet Reuters has decided to drop what they admitted was an “appealing alternative” and the reason for this is clear in my opinion.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium