Pollster competition is healthy

Public opinion polling, in any given country, is the assessment of the sentiments of the entire population—usually of its citizens, but even noncitizen residents may be included—based on the aggregate of views stated by a representative sample of them, analyzed by principles of statistics. As such, it is naturally fitted for countries that are committed to democracy as a form of government, and periodically renew their leadership on the basis of popular elections.

The United States, where polling originated, has very many pollsters, generally grouped into commercial (the market research companies), media, academic, nonprofit, and party-based (Republican or Democratic); and there are also tie-ups across the pollsters. This multiplicity is an important US societal asset. Some polls are confidential, but very many are open.

On the other hand, in countries under secure authoritarian rule, polling is not too critical to the governing class; hence it occurs seldom, and is usually undisclosed. Nevertheless, democratic or not, all countries have their own social scientists, who are well versed in the principles and practices of opinion polling, and are capable of doing such polling, either for themselves or for sponsors. They may well be polling secretly, for all we know, using resources from who knows where (domestic or foreign); but typically they are not allowed to share their findings freely with their fellow citizens.

The more democratic the country, the more vigorous and open is its polling, in general. Thus, in the case of US President Donald J. Trump, not only do the American people know, but also foreign leaders like Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chinese President Xi Jinping, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, Iran’s present leadership, and Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos know, and the people of Russia, China, North Korea, Iran and the Philippines know, or can easily learn, how extremely unpopular he has become among Americans themselves. It might be that envy of the longevities of Putin (since 2000), Xi (since 2012), and Kim (since 2011) is another reason for Trump’s authoritarian tendencies.

According to a well-known poll compiler (natesilver.net, 4/29/26), Trump’s newest percentages are 39 approval and 57 disapproval, and that “yesterday his net approval rating hit a new second-term low of -18.8.” Trump is such a poor sport that he mobilized his administration against the Gallup Organization in particular (see David W. Moore, “Gallup ends presidential approval rating after 88 years–likely because a President disapproved,” 3/6/26, fair.org). Because Gallup has many large government contracts, which are all potentially cancellable by Trump, it apparently decided that it could not afford to maintain its traditional rating system anymore.

On the other hand, it’s not equally easy for Trump to know how popular in their own countries are Putin, Xi, and Kim. Might they be as unpopular as he is to Americans? There would have to be some American agents doing secret polls in Russia, China, and North Korea, which is also possible. (Could it be that Trump had reliable polls for Venezuela, but not for Iran?)

How does one know the quality of an opinion poll, aside from the classic basis of its performance in predicting elections? The quality of the sampling procedure—the suitability of the sampling frame, the number of respondents, the randomness of their selection—is only one factor of polling quality. The phrasing and sequencing of the questions, the mode of interaction (face-to-face, telephone, or online?), the respondents’ confidence in their privacy, etc. also matter a lot.

Most of all, what happens when the subject matter of a poll is not the electability of candidates—which gets to be ultimately counted by a Commission on Elections—but other things for which statistics are not (or not yet) created by the government or any other institutions? Where are the alternative numbers with which a poll may be compared? It is the replication of measurements that provides scientific confidence.

The most important means for assessing a scientific measurement of public opinion—or of anything else for that matter—is the presence of alternative, independent, measurement/s (preferably plural) of public opinion—or whatever is being measured—so as to make comparisons. The existence of multiple surveys, done by non-colluding agents, gives basis for verification of a measurement. Stated in economics jargon, there should be a fair degree of open competition among pollsters, not a monopoly. Such competition is healthy and welcome to us pollsters, as it is to other scientific communities.