Rigging the Polls

   "Vote early and often" used to be the watchword for machine politicians more than 80 years ago to stuff the ballot boxes for candidates the party bosses favored, but stricter regulation and electronic voting put a stop to that, regardless of what some claim these days.
   However, in the Internet Age of online polling, it's easier to recruit an army of volunteers to click on a survey site, make a choice, then click refresh or delete, then access the site again and vote again. thus stacking the online deck to help produce a "strong lead" for the party's candidate.
   Suppose Sean Hannity of the Fox TV network asked viewers of his show which candidate won the debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. That poll, conducted through the Breitbart web site, will show an overwhelming majority felt strongly that Trump was the clear winner.
   Both Hannity and the Breitbart operators are known conservatives and strong supporters of the Trump candidacy.
   And with the results of this and similar "polls," the candidate can then proudly announce to followers at campaign rallies that he "won" the debate, citing the results of "major polls."
   That's the major flaw in the concept of online polling -- it relies on volunteers to participate in the survey, and avid supporters are happy to vote early and often to support their Beloved Leader.
   In contrast, the more reputable surveys conducted by established polling organizations use scientific sampling methods developed over many decades to obtain a valid sampling of a population, and using careful phrasing to avoid leading questions.
   It has taken a few weeks, but major news media have finally noticed that online polling of volunteer participants sponsored by partisan support groups are not as reliable as the results obtained by scientific polls.
   Granted, the online volunteer polls are faster, and can publish results within an hour of the conclusion of a televised political debate, but that alone doesn't make it reliable.
   In a way, that's like asking Chicago Cubs fans which is the finest team in Major League Baseball. It's a good bet what the answer will be, even though their beloved Cubbies have not won a World Series Championship since 1908. That's right, 1908, more than 100 years ago. But hope springs eternal, and it is indeed possible that this may be The Year. However, many Cubs fans are reluctant to talk about it, lest it jinx the team's chances.
   So do the Chicago Cubs stand as good a chance as winning the World Series Championship as Donald Trump has of winning the presidential election?
   That's a question for pollsters to include in their next survey. But when the results come in, consider the source.