In the State of Michigan both the democrat primary and the general elections were more inaccurate than any scientific polls have been since the early 20 th century. This thesis explored two questions. The first was, how wrong were the polls in the 2016 Michigan presidential election? The second was, how and in what ways might pollsters have made different analyses in forecasting the same election? This qualitative study was conducted using primary research through interviews with pollsters who conducted polls of the 2016 elections in the State of Michigan. The findings showed that the polls were wrong and that polling could be improved through the integration of new technologies in voter contact methods, changes in demographic sample weighting procedures based on voter enthusiasm, and better interpretation of polls by public opinion research consumers.
|Commitee:||Colt, Steve, Dennis Holmes, Beverly, Larkin, Matthew|
|School:||Alaska Pacific University|
|School Location:||United States -- Alaska|
|Source:||MAI 58/03M(E), Masters Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Marketing, Political science, Information science|
|Keywords:||Clinton, Hillary, Data analysis, Elections, Polling, Public opinion, Trump, Donald|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be