What's wrong with modern polling? Some of it stinks.

"More than 40 percent of Republicans who were polled for The New York Times said they expected their family to be worse off financially in a year’s time, up from 4 percent in October. Democrats expressed a rise in optimism — though not as sharp as the change in Republican sentiment. The new polling, by the online research firm SurveyMonkey, reaffirms the degree to which Americans’ confidence in the economy’s path has become entwined with partisanship and ideology."

I've no doubt about partisanship and ideology being entwined with economic outlooks. Also doubtless is that many Republicans responded with artificial gloom, merely because a Democrat will sit in the White House, although the economy has historically performed better under Democratic administrations.

What escapes me is how any of this can be "reaffirmed" by SurveyMonkey, an online polling operation which has earned a "D-" grade from FiveThirtyEight. Was SurveyMonkey simply the lowest bidder? Could the Times not have done a bit better? After all, the paper's "Upshot" section coordinated throughout the presidential campaign with "A+" Siena.

SurveyMonkey is just a half-mark away from being banned ("X") by FiveThirtyEight, which diligently tracks polling performances. And why the "Paper of Record" would commission such a slacker is, as I have noted, beyond me.

Comments

[Peter G]

Well it sure wasn’t budgetary constraints. Their coffers were swelling from a surge in subscriptions. So much so that they are cornering the market with new hires from the punditry class. Latest acquisition is Ezra Klein the other cofounder of Vox. It is a mystery.