Generally, in the 2016 United States Presidential Election, Mr. Trump was underestimated by 6.9% and greater than the margin of error. Against this background, the paper discusses the shortcomings of the existing methods and supports the view that a new polling method is needed when related to “opinions”. Graphs show that the maximum error did not occur at the expected value, nor did the data align with a normal statistical bell-shaped distribution. Vulnerabilities exist with combining fact-based statistical analysis with feeling-based opinions. Basic statistics equations do not cover feeling- based factors, i.e. biases, truthfulness, competency, nonresponse rates, etc. A comprehensive pollster accuracy study showed that the most widely used pollsters had significant biases favoring Democrats over Republicans. The 2016 polling failures illustrate deficiencies in the existing approach supporting the view that a new methodology is needed such as Statistical Error Analysis, On-Line Methodology, and others.
AAPOR (2013). Report of the AAPOR Task Force on Non-Probability Sampling. Oakbrook Terrace, IL: American Association for Public Opinion Research. https://www.aapor.org/AAPOR_Main/media/MainSiteFiles/NPS_TF_Report_Final_7_revised_FNL_6 _22_13.pdf
Blumberg, S., & Luke, J. (2007). Wireless Substitution: Early Release of Estimates Based on Data from the National Health Interview Survey. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis.htm
Cassino, D. (2016). How Polls Overestimate Support for Third-Party Candidates. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2016/11/how-polls-overestimate-support-for-third-party-candidates
Dahlgaard, J., Hanse, K., & Larsen, M. (2016). How Are Voters Influenced by Opinion Polls? The Effect of Polls on Voting Behavior and Party Sympathy. World Political Science, 12, 283-300. https://doi.org/10.1515/wps-2016-0012
Epstein, R. (2019). Interview on Life, Liberty & Levin. https://video.foxnews.com/v/6084154651001/#sp=show-clips
Epstein, R., & Robertson, R. (2017). A Method for Detecting Bias in Search Ranking, with Evidence of a Systematic Bias Related to the 2016 Presidential Election. Vista, CA: American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology. https://aibrt.org/downloads/EPSTEIN_&_ROBERTSON_2017-A_Method_for_Detecting_Bias_in_ Search_Rankings-AIBRT_WP-17-02_6-1-17.pdf
Ginsberg, J., Mohebbi, M., Patel, R., Brammer, L., Smolinski, M., & Brilliant, L. (2009). Detecting Influenza Epidemics Using Search Engine Query Data. Nature, 457, 1012-1014. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07634
Groves, R., & Peytcheva, E. (2008). The Impact of Nonresponse Rates on Nonresponse Bias: A Meta-Analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72, 167-189. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfn011
Jomeh, A., & Lauter, D. (2016). Where the Presidential Race Stands Today. Los Angeles Times. http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/
Kastellac, J., Lax, J., & Phillips, J. (2010). Estimating State Public Opinion with Multi-Level Regression and Poststratification Using R. Unpublished Manuscript. https://scholar.princeton.edu/jkastellec/publications/race-context-and-judging-courts-appeals-race -based-panel-effects-death-0
Kennedy, C., & Caumont, A. (2016). What We Learned about Online Nonprobability Polls. Washington DC: Pew Research Center. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/05/02/q-a-online-nonprobability-polls/
Kennedy, C., & Deane, C. (2017). A Basic Question When Reading a Poll: Does It Include or Exclude Nonvoters. Washington DC: Pew Research Center. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/02/16/does-poll-include-or-exclude-nonvoters/
Kiersz, A., & Walker, H. (2014). These Charts Show the Political Bias of Workers in Each Profession. New York City: Business Insider. http://www.businessinsider.com/charts-show-the-political-bias-of-each-profession-2014-11
Knappen, H (2014). Capturing the Effects of Public Opinion Polls on Voter Support in the NY 25th Congressional Election. Rochester, NY: Rochester Institute of Technology. http://scholarworks.rit.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=9712&context=theses
Lampos, V., & Cohn, T. (2013). A User-Centric Model of Voting Intention Form Social Media. In Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) (pp. 993-1003). Sofia Bulgaria. http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/P13-1098
NCPP (2017). Election Reports, Analysis of How Polls Did 1936-2000. New York. http://www.ncpp.org/files/1936-2000.pdf
Nelson, M. (2019). US Patent Application Publication US 2019/0108195 A1.
O’Connor, B., Balasubramanyan, R., Routledge, B., & Smith, N. (2010). From Tweets to Polls: Linking Text Sentiment to Public Opinion Time Series. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (pp. 1-8). Washington DC. https://homes.cs.washington.edu/~nasmith/papers/oconnor+balasubramanyan+routledge+smith. icwsm10.pdf
Sakaki, T., Okazaki, M., & Matsuo, Y. (2010). Earthquake Shakes Twitter Users: Real-Time Event Detection by Social Sensors. In Proceedings of the Nineteenth International WWW Conference (pp. 851-860). New York: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1772690.1772777 http://ymatsuo.com/papers/www2010.pdf
Silver, N. (2012). Which Polls Fared Best (and Worst) in the 2012 Presidential Race. Bristol, CT: FiveThirtyEight, ESPN Inc. https://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/10/which-polls-fared-best-and-worst-in-the-2012 -presidential-race/?_r=0
Silver, N., Kanjana, J., & Mehta, D. (2016). FiveThirtyEight’s Pollster Ratings. Bristol, CT: Five Thirty Eight, ESPN Inc. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pollster-ratings/
Smith, A. (2016). Why Polls on Third-Party Candidates Aren’t Always Accurate. New York: Time Inc. http://time.com/4390199/pollsters-third-party-candidates/
Smith, S. M. (2017). Determining Sample Size. Qualtrics. eBook. https://www.qualtrics.com
Tavabi, L. (2015). Evaluation of Political Sentiment on Twitter. Los Angeles, CA: University of California. http://escholarship.org/uc/item/5j82j35h
USDA (2014). Farm Demographics. Washington DC: US Government Printing Office. https://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2012/Online_Resources/Highlights/Farm_ Demographics/Highlights_Farm_Demographics.pdf
Vlachos, M., Meek, C., Vagena, Z., & Gunopulos, D. (2004). Identifying Similarities, Periodicities and Bursts for Online Search Queries. In Proceedings of the 2004 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data (pp. 131-142). New York: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1007568.1007586 http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.75.2564&rep=rep1&type=pdf