3 ms·
Why not just do statistically valid polling? The problem is that politicians run this weird highly skewed sampling method of "community input" and then think t
by mediaman 4y ago
Why not just do statistically valid polling?
The problem is that politicians run this weird highly skewed sampling method of "community input" and then think they've got the pulse of the community, where in fact they've just heard from loudmouths with too much time on their hands.
A statistical poll would at least show what the actual constituency wants, not the loud, bored subset.
The subset problem is also why we see much more extreme politics in cities among elected positions that have less visibility: city council members tend to be much more extreme than mayors, because the latter has greater voter participation.
- bluGill 4y agoYou need to get a poll of people who will vote in the next election should this pass, and a different poll for people who will vote in the next election should this fail to pass. Note that different people will show up should this pass vs not pass, and it is people who turn up on election day that matter (show up means their ballot is counted, absentee ballots count as showing up) This is very different from statistical polling.
- mediaman 4y agoThis sounds like objecting to something much better than the awful practice today because it’s not theoretical perfection.
- solveit 4y agoAlso, politicians actually are supposed to represent all of their constituents, not just the ones that vote. There is no incentive to do so of course, but that is what they are supposed to do.
- bombcar 4y agoPolling is what you do to provide evidence to support doing what you already want done.