Ricardo Pascoe Pierce
One notable feature of the current election campaign has been the use of polls for propaganda purposes. Because of this, polls inevitably vary in their results Crazily.
Crazily would not seem to be a particularly accurate adjective. But in this case, it is particularly precise. The first thing that strikes one is the number of disparate results. They are extraordinarily different in their results, but at the same time, they offer the public a certainty of 95% confidence with a statistical error of 2%-3%. These data dazzle the reader looking for some reasonable degree of certainty.
The surveys generally show dissatisfaction with government policies regarding security, corruption, health, and education. They also confirm a general approval of social support programs, especially those for the elderly. Given this reality, it would be expected that polls would reflect this disparity of criteria: some are more critical, while others are more complacent with the government in office.
El Financiero’s latest survey captures these social moods. While a large majority of recipients of social programs would vote for Morena, a majority of those who do not receive such support would vote for the opposition. This survey practically defines the country’s electoral division.
This data provided by El Financiero is important for pollsters. It is very simple if they want a favorable result for Morena. They conduct their polls disproportionately, favoring areas with a population mainly receiving social benefits. Marcelo Ebrard accused the internal Morena pollsters of favoring electoral sections with more Sheinbaum presence. She apparently won the candidacy by employing such tactics.
Considering objective data on dissatisfaction with public policies, except for social programs, the data on electoral preferences for the Presidency of the Republic vary crazily, as we have established.
The firm De Las Heras yields the following result, with a participation of 50% of the electorate: Morena 67%, Opposition 30%, MC 3%.
The firm AOL y Jones Consultores S.C. offers three results, contingent on the percentage of participation. With a 55% voter turnout, Morena 47%, Opposition 46%, MC 7%.
With a turnout of 63%, Morena 44%, Opposition 49%, MC 7%.
With a participation of 70%, Morena 42%, Opposition 51%, MC 7%.
Massive Caller’s daily time series yields the following results as of yesterday: Morena 42.5%, Opposition 35.8%, MC 6.5%, and undecided 15.2%.
El Financiero yields the following result without defining a percentage of participation: Morena 49%, Opposition 32%, MC 8%, undecided 11%.
With these variables on the table, the first emotion is one of absolute confusion: How can it be that one poll has Morena 37 points ahead of the opposition while another, equally respectable, registers a difference between first and second place of 6.7%? Obviously, there are many factors that make the results vary: the areas surveyed, the methodology used, and the formulation of the questions. All these elements can distort the final results and, therefore, the message to the public.
There are also strong presumptions about the possible purchase of results to favor one side. As was found with Ebrard’s accusation against Sheinbaum, it is perfectly feasible to design results favorable to one side of the scale with credible technical justifications. And, apparently, this is a common practice in Morena.
There are two contradictory messages emanating from the polls. One message is that “this rice is already cooked” and that Morena’s victory is an inevitability.
The other message is that “the coin is in the air” and that Morena and the opposition are competing closely.
All polls coincide in the testimonial character of MC’s presence in the race.
What is evident is that there are two large blocks of polls currently being disseminated. Those that confirm an unreachable lead for Morena. They pretend to have a political impact on the mood of the electorate. And others, the polls that suggest a competitive and close race.
At the end of the electoral process, and knowing the verdict of the polls, it will be necessary to issue a political, ethical, and legal judgment on the role taken by the polls in a contest where two contrasting models of society are at stake, and moreover, the very future of Mexico.
[email protected]
@rpascoep
Further Reading: