Would you like to see political polls abolished?

[Kasmos]

Please read the following before posting:

I got to thinking today about something that I think could solve a lot of the problems that we have when it comes to Americans voting in elections.

Now, granted, this could be considered going against the 1st Amendment, but hypothetically imagine if all political polls were outlawed. If media stations didn't show you who the leader/s were in each party, and you were forced to actually pick the person you thought was the better candidate instead of voting for the "current winning" guy.

Do you think that we would start electing better policians in office instead of the same hack jobs we get every election? I think so. I think if Americans had to actually think about who they wanted instead of "safely" voting for the "leading" candidate, we'd see people like Ron Paul have a fighting chance of making a difference.

So I ask you guys, hypothetically, would you like to see political polls abolished? Would you think it be beneficial to America if the citizens did not know who the current "leader" was in the polls and come election day voted for who they truly thought should be leader? In another poll about voting for a 3rd party candidate, the general consensus was that its pointless since the "majority" of people (based off polls) were voting one way or another. Do you think if people thought their vote mattered they'd take who they voted for more seriously?

I think so, and although I realize that this would break the 1st Amendment by not allowing media stations to conduct polls, I also think it would change the way we vote as a society and change the continuing election of "the lesser of two evils". What are your thoughts?

 

[TOJ]

Cool, a poll on abolishing polls. If someone answers yes, are they being hypocritical?

 

[Kandahar]

I think so, and although I realize that this would break the 1st Amendment by not allowing media stations to conduct polls, I also think it would change the way we vote as a society and change the continuing election of "the lesser of two evils". What are your thoughts?

Abolishing free speech is the greater of two evils. Although actually, "lesser of two evils" voting isn't really evil at all. It's just rational.

 

[The Mark]

I think that, if a certain percentage of persons are waiting to vote until they think one candidate is winning, those same persons, denied the data required to make such a decision, would decide not to vote because it wasn't safe.

However, IMO, the percentage of people who vote on this basis is very VERY small.

 

[rivrrat]

What the heck? You mean... you think people should actually think for themselves and not follow the herd?

*gasp*

How utterly... logical, reasonable, and responsible of you. It's a novel idea... vote for the candidate you WANT in office. I like it!! It's almost as if that was the whole purpose of our system of government to begin with. :mrgreen:

 

[TOJ]

What the heck? You mean... you think people should actually think for themselves and not follow the herd?

*gasp*

How utterly... logical, reasonable, and responsible of you. It's a novel idea... vote for the candidate you WANT in office. I like it!! It's almost as if that was the whole purpose of our system of government to begin with. :mrgreen:

Does this mean you are in favor of outlawing polls?

:2razz:

 

[Edify_Always_In_All_Ways]

No. It is against the first amendment, and most people vote for the candidates they like when bother to vote, in my experience. Instead of banning polls, push for campaign finance reform- as the candidate with the most money becomes the "leader" almost by default anyway.

 

[rivrrat]

Does this mean you are in favor of outlawing polls?

:2razz:

LOL Well, ya know.... I can't abide censorship in any form. However, I think that people would actually vote the way THEY wanted if they couldn't see the herd in order to follow them. Ya know?

Then again, you'd probably have a number of folks running around frantically screaming, "OH CRAP! I don't know who to vote for because I don't know who everyone else is voting for! Whatever will I do!?"

And then they'll just implode upon themselves when the panic and tension gets too much.

Hmm... natural selection! :mrgreen:

 

[The Mark]

LOL Well, ya know.... I can't abide censorship in any form. However, I think that people would actually vote the way THEY wanted if they couldn't see the herd in order to follow them. Ya know?

Then again, you'd probably have a number of folks running around frantically screaming, "OH CRAP! I don't know who to vote for because I don't know who everyone else is voting for! Whatever will I do!?"

And then they'll just implode upon themselves when the panic and tension gets too much.

Hmm... natural selection! :mrgreen:

Nah, they'll probably just ask about 5-10 of their friends who are more able to make decisions who they are voting for, thus taking their own tiny poll.

 

[TOJ]

LOL Well, ya know.... I can't abide censorship in any form. However, I think that people would actually vote the way THEY wanted if they couldn't see the herd in order to follow them. Ya know?

Then again, you'd probably have a number of folks running around frantically screaming, "OH CRAP! I don't know who to vote for because I don't know who everyone else is voting for! Whatever will I do!?"

And then they'll just implode upon themselves when the panic and tension gets too much.

Hmm... natural selection! :mrgreen:

Well crap. I could tolerate a little censorshp in the name of improving the species in that way.

:lol:

 

[Gibberish]

It's not about polls its about face time. The more money a candidate has to invest to advertising and marketing the more likely they are to win the election.

 

[niftydrifty]

I answered "other." I'd like to see political polls as they are now conducted abolished, and for similar reasons. but abolishing polls completely is a crazy idea. knowing public opinion is helpful not harmful. what is harmful is predicting the "leader" on election day. we all know this is inaccurate, and yet they do it. the infotainers have no interest in being accurate.

the issue kasmos is getting at here is the sheep mentality, and abolishing polls won't get rid of that. most people don't think. abolishing polls isn't going to kickstart any kind of logical discernment amongst jane and joe public, for sure.

concerning polls, though, I do think that altering the way political poll questions are asked would make them more useful and enlightening.

for example, instead of simply asking "Hillary, Obama, Giuliani, or McCain?" ... there should also be a follow up question. it would be, "alright, now that you've told me whom you'd vote for if the election were today, now please tell me this: do you even care enough to bother voting at all?" most people will say no, if they're honest.

and even better would be, "why?" having people explain why they plan to vote for whomever would be revealing to say the least.

election polls are always flawed. they are conducted in such a way as to assume that almost 100% of respondents are going to vote. usually less than half of them will. it's ****ed up. so as a result we have grossly misleading polls.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Instead of abolishing political polls, how about abolishing politicians?

 

[Sergeant Stinger1]

I voted YES.
I would like to know how many polls are taken in heavy Dems or Repub areas?
Even the polls of the people going in and out from voting are probably taken in heavily Dem or Repub areas.
-
Lets not think that a heavy biased radio or TV show would go into 'the other guys territory' to get any results.

 

[TOJ]

Should a person be allowed to talk to friends or family or just people at a mall about how they planned to vote?

If so should they be allowed to :
1. tell their family about the results?
2. tell their coworkers?
3, write a letter to the local newspaper?
4. tell a local TV reporter in hopes they would put it on the air?
5. buy an ad on TV to tell about the results?
6. tell the story in the newpaper they own?
7. tell the story on a TV station they own?
8. have the story reported on a major network where they are a the CEO?

Of those who voted Yes and/or posted that they thought polling should be abolished/curtailed, I would bet :
1. almost all would think the first 2 are OK
2. most would think 3 is OK
3. some would start peeling off at 4 and most would be gone by 8

Seems a lot of the good folks here are perfectly happy to limit other people's speech rights. Some who have written here about limiting others rights are the same ones who have boasted other places about joining a rebellion to protect/restore rights.

I doubt many will answer the above questions honestly, but this thread has been enlightening. Rights are kind of like taxes. Don't tax you, don't tax me, tax the man behind the tree.

I don't think polling should be limited, I just think those who give any credence to polls are not very bright. The results can be whatever the pollsters what them to be.

IMO, the fact that polling has become so prevelent just proves how stupid the people of the US have become. As long as pepole keep listening to polls and basing their actions on those polls, pollsters will continue orchestrating them.

 

[TOJ]

Instead of abolishing political polls, how about abolishing politicians?

Politicians are those who practice politics and politics come into play anytime more than two people get together. Those who are good at it get their way most times.

 

[Onine]

Wouldnt make any difference at all.

Otherwise, why would Rudy be "in the lead"?????????? :roll:

 

[RightinNYC]

I don't think they should be outlawed, but I think it would be good if parties and groups went back to internal polling rather than releasing the results to the general public.

Polls are very useful for helping organizations and individuals figure out plans of actions. They're also very useful for organizations who want to convince herds of dumb people to believe whatever they want them to believe.

 

[dragonslayer]

No, don't do away with political polls. It would increase the chances of destroying the constitution. Yet that is the goal of the Right.

Polls= Freedom of Speech, which Bush, Cheney, Rove, Libby, and the other criminals hate.

 

[TOJ]

Yes, we all want to destroy the constitution, that's what makes us conservative. And we all sit around in gigantic gothic rooms with walls of red velvet and split our time between tapping our long skeletal fingers against each other while plotting evil and drinking fine brandy mixed with orphan tears, as we only care about money. :roll:

Partisan hackery is the lowest form of discourse short of childish name calling.

But that's the only way some folks know how to participate. If you take that away from them they won't be able to think of anything to say.

t Do the people of IA City know you are in their midst or do you keep your political leaning quite for the locals? If they knew you might be run out of town. t

 

[Joby]

I think it'd be great if the media stopped doing polls and actually investigated and presented each candidate.

No more of the "first-tier" "second-tier" crap. The media has turned the election into a super-bowl of sorts, with many people supporting a candidate because "they like him." and that's as deep as it goes!

 

[talloulou]

I don't think they should be outlawed, but I think it would be good if parties and groups went back to internal polling rather than releasing the results to the general public.

Oh I don't know if I like that idea. Then they can lie and claim "most people think such and such.." and being sheep a great many will start thinking that way merely because they want to be part of "most people" vs the outsider. That's how abortion was sold.

 

[talloulou]

I think it'd be great if the media stopped doing polls and actually investigated and presented each candidate.

Are you kidding? The media rarely investigates even issues anymore. They just bring on two opposing blowhards and let them duke it out with no fact checker whatsoever so those who have no time to do their own investigating are left deciding which blowhard they like better! I would love to see a program where people with opposing views are allowed to argue but the film is showed at a later time after the entire transcript is put through a fact checker. Every lie, half truth, ect could be pointed out on some sort of scroll at the bottom of the tv. Then everytime a blowhard "expert" or politician or whatever appears on the show they could also have a background introduction showing how many times they've been caught lying, exaggerating, ect.... Truthiness meters! Imagine if everyone on Fox and MSNBC was caught on every fvcking lie or half truth they dared to spew. That would be refreshing and entertaining television!

 

[TOJ]

lol, I'm 6'6" and well tattooed, there's no way these granola eaters around here would do a damn thing, so I am loud and proud about my political leaning. In one of my classes last year I had the joys of defending my position that there should be an increase in the licenses to carry concealed weapons issued (without compromising standards, but encouraging those who meet the standards to apply) in front of my class, of typical political leanings for college students in Iowa City, the day after the Virginia Tech shootings, they looked at me like I was advocating reanimating Hitler's corpse and making it king!

I know IA City is one of the most left leaning towns in the midwest.

 

[Synch]

Of course I would like to see political polls be abolished, they're one of the most insidious entities in a democratic republic, but not by the government, out of sheer principle.