BROADCASTS.com

In the run-up to any modern presidential election, assessing a candidate\\u2019s successes and failures has served as fodder for political pundits, analysts and campaign advisers. And in part, those assessments of who is winning and which messages are working are drawn from a whole sprawling effort designed to take the pulse of the American voter: political polling.

These days, there are public polls, private polls and polling shops out of news organizations, universities and research centers. There\\u2019s also internal polling specifically conducted for candidates with a stake in a given race. Each kind of poll serves a different purpose and often a different audience. But they have in common an effort to learn more about how Americans make choices about what issues to value, what causes to believe in and about which candidates to support.

Reporting shows that President Trump has been watching polls closely as the November election nears. And, at this point, things are not looking great for Trump, who trails Joe Biden in most national polls. Trump\\u2019s team has argued that many polls that show a Biden lead are skewed, that a\\u201csilent majority\\u201d of voters will turn out for him in the fall, and that 2020 polling is just a repeat of 2016 polling, which showed Hillary Clinton leading nationally.

Of course, as 2016 showed, polls aren\\u2019t perfect. And the ways they are interpreted can also present problems. But they remain critical to the American electoral process.

On this episode of the\\u201cCan He Do That?\\u201d podcast, The Post\\u2019s polling team, Scott Clement and Emily Guskin, delve into conducting and interpreting polls during an election season. How exactly can polls be representative of the electorate? And are polls predictive of how a country will eventually vote?

Related episodes