So far, presidential election polls have revealed … absolutely nothing! Maybe that sounds harsh. Maybe it’s too early to expect any relevant insights. But we’re learning virtually nothing.
Today’s polls compare Joe Biden to his party peers (not much there to study), and Donald Trump in all his ubiquity to his Republican challengers (lots). Pollsters conduct a survey, ask who on the list you like, post numbers, and come forth with the revelation: Biden and Trump are the “frontrunners”!
Both are, in a sense, incumbents. They bring a historical base. So, like we always treat incumbents, it turns out that voters prefer not to change. Voter preference is in the high 60s for Biden and in the 50s for Trump.
Must we be fixated through the coming months on polls that only compare the frontrunner and the rest? Unfortunately, that is about all we are given.
Pre-election polls are attuned to the horse race metaphor. The polling industry questions respondents on their favorites and rank orders them—who’s in front of who at a particular time. These rankings can always change, which leads to further polls just like the last one.
Why must polling be just like horse racing, which lasts two minutes? The presidential race lasts two years! Last I checked, it is 14+ months until election day and we are over four months out from the primaries.
I’ve learned voter polls happen this way because they are easy, inexpensive to execute, and don’t really have to be accurate. They may give an impression of a particular campaign’s momentum, but don’t really measure a candidate’s long-term viability. The jockeying to-and-fro is not dramatic or even interesting.
Tracking polls at this stage can actually do more harm than good. Particularly for this election, they have a way of cementing the frontrunners in our minds. They subtly convince us of the inevitability of the top candidates, since no one else appears to provide a viable challenge.
The polls cast those who might be very respectable candidates as barely significant. Horse race-style snapshots reveal little but they do keep the polling company’s name out there. A given candidate may benefit if a bump helps fundraising. But this doesn’t benefit the voter.
I asked John Geraci, author of the book “POLL-ARIZED” about the value of the current polling. He said: “It is no secret that most Americans would like to see candidates other than Biden or Trump in the next election. Both have low favorability ratings. There are many reasons why we are likely to end up with these two candidates anyway, and conducting polls too early is one factor.”
Perhaps we should view early polling more like an exhibition season — we are not yet playing games of any significance. In other words, a winless exhibition season may not indicate a losing regular season. Problem is, these pools skew our minds toward the familiar.
The problem is this: We are taking measures of trends that don’t track to our country’s real interests. We would be better served by a fresh polling approach that poses questions that uncover the truths we need. We need to know more than who’s up/down, who got a bump, who gaffed and dipped, who needs to give up.
As examples, why don’t we ask these:
“Do you believe Joe Biden deserves another term as president?” And: “Do you believe Donald Trump deserves another term as president?” These questions could evoke a dramatic response.
Rather than comparisons to a host of other players within their parties could we compare a frontrunner candidate to himself?
I would love to see a pollster ask this: “Do you prefer a presidential election in 2024 in which both Joe Biden and Donald Trump are NOT candidates?”
Yes! Let’s ask the voters this. There are certainly plenty of reasons both Biden and Trump should go silently into the night. We should poll for the approval number for this happening.
We would need to achieve a kind of bi-polar consensus to actually make this happen. There are those who only want to see Biden run because they think he can beat Trump as he has done before. There are those who are afraid that a Trump-less race removes the best chance to prevent another Biden term.
Fact is . . . and this is only a suspicion as we lack polling numbers …. most will register “likes” if they both disappear simultaneously.
As I’ve written, it is possible to eliminate both Biden and Trump from the race constitutionally. By passing a 17-word amendment, we can age both out of contention. It is time for a constitutional amendment that disqualifies candidates at a certain age.
We need only observe one Joe Biden public appearance to see that letting him run is absurd. It simply invites major risks of term disruption.
A constitutional amendment can happen fast. The 26th Amendment was introduced in Congress in March 1971 and ratified by July 1971—four months. The 26th addressed a politicized issue, granting 18-year-olds the vote. My proposed amendment eliminates both frontrunners. If we do it now, the race becomes a real race.
What will we learn from more useful presidential polls with non-standard questions? Here is a guess: People are tired and want a chance to envision some better options. They are tired of the parties serving up poor choices. They will prove to you that they will welcome a way to nix the Biden/Trump rematch.
I suspect the vast majority of Americans would give up their own party’s frontrunner if it would also get rid of the other party’s. This scenario would ignite a refreshing conversation about how a new leader will govern. If a frontrunner repeats, you and I are destined to relive half of the previous eight years over the next four. A scary thought!
Where is the pollster who will ask the most important question we need answered now: “Can we do without both of these guys?”
Bill Porter, a freelance writer, is a former business developer and proposal writer for the IT industry.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller.