Watching the grand theater that is American politics, professional market researchers can find much amusement in the sideshow debate over how Americans really perceive the healthcare bill.
Sunday, I watched the battle of the polls, well, actually, both sides tossing poll results back and forth to prove their respective positions. I had a delightful belly laugh!
The Republicans cite (unnamed) polls which find that by a margin of 3 to 1, Americans are opposed to the current healthcare bill. By extension, Congress is ignoring the will of the people.
The Democrats then cite (again unnamed) polls which show that Americans are overwhelmingly in favor of the major aspects of the bill (universal coverage, banning insurance carriers from refusing those with pre-existing conditions, etc.). By extension, Congress is finding the guts to do what is right.
So who is being truthful? Or, to put it more rationally, who has the most insight into the perceptions of the public at large?
Well, that depends on who you ask, and what you ask.
Over the last twenty years, political polling has evolved from the “have you stopped beating your wife?” school of research to a highly sophisticated science, accounting for a plethora of factors that drive behavior. Consequently, political polling has gotten much more accurate in predicting election results.
But the “have you stopped beating your wife?” school is still alive and well. Just last week I received a survey in the mail that asked for my opinion on abortion (and then solicited a donation to fight “this scourge”). As you might imagine, the questions were not exactly worded in a balanced, rational manner.
More to follow.
Comments welcome!
Dr. Bob
{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
The GOP and Democratic interpretations of the polls are not inconsistent. Survey respondents can agree with individual components of a bill, but disagree with the bill taken as a whole when a price tag is attached.
Drawing an analogy to marketing, a consumer can like a car’s styling, performance and features when considered separately, but still decline to buy it if the price is perceived to be too high, or if the consumer does not need a new car.
Ratings of individual product features or legislative components are relatively meaningless, because the respondent does not need to make tradeoffs. We only understand a consumer’s true preferences when a choice is required.