In an election as close as the one that Argentina has experienced in the first presidential round, the least that is expected of the polls is that they provide clear answers to the fundamental questions. In this case, two essential questions arose: whether a candidate would manage to win the presidency in the first instance, avoiding a second round, and, derived from this, if a second one was required. round, which contenders would advance? The polls, for the most part, were correct in anticipating that it would be Javier Milei, representing the right, and Sergio Massa, for the left, who would compete in an eventual second round, seeing it as highly unlikely that any candidate would reach 45% of the votes. or 40% with a difference of 10 points over the second, as stipulated by Argentine regulations. However, despite this success, the general subsequent assessment has come to question the precision of the surveys. The main reason is that many predictions pointed to Milei as the favorite, but in the end it was Sergio Massa who led the race.
The cognitive fixation of our attention on the winner is something inherent to any electoral competition. And the candidates are not only fighting against themselves, but with respect to expectations. Right now, the headline and analysis in the majority of media and networks in Argentina focuses precisely on the fact that beyond the absolute numbers of votes, what has really surprised is how the expectations, fueled to a certain extent Through these surveys, they have framed and conditioned the perception of the result. It is common for a candidate who exceeds expectations, even if he does not win, to be perceived as a “moral winner.” On the other hand, the one who does not comply with what was anticipated, even if he has the most votes, can be seen as a weakened candidate. Massa, by surpassing Milei despite predictions, defied previous expectations, gaining an additional boost in public perception. It is paradoxical, however, that these expectations were set just two months ago, when the polls were not correct in the volume of votes that Milei would receive.
When observing the data at the national level in comparison with the electoral results, this double assessment is clearly evident. On the one hand, the polls were correct in identifying the first three candidates, in highlighting the gap between them and the rest of the competitors, and in predicting that Patricia Bullrich would not advance to the second round. Likewise, the average expected that no candidate would achieve victory in the first round. However, there is a notable underestimation of Sergio Massa and, although to a lesser extent, an overestimation in favor of Javier Milei.
This methodology has resulted in the average being more precise in the case of Sergio Massa by not including the undecided. However, it has been slightly less accurate in the case of Milei and even less so with Bullrich.
Closely related to this is participation, which on this occasion has been notably lower than in recent years. The decision of whether to participate or not is, in reality, more frequent than the decision to change votes between candidates. In a context like Argentina, characterized by its extreme polarization, it is more common for voters to fluctuate between voting or abstaining, instead of changing their preference between different parties. Although it is true that a trend of vote transfer has been seen between the two right-wing candidates, for Massa, the increase in his support is probably due more to the mobilization of those undecided than to the direct transfer of votes from other candidates to him. .
If we take the polls based on the figures that each one reported in its latest version, that is, reincorporating the undecided in the voter base, we observe the following: The vast majority, if not all, were correct in predicting who would advance to the second return, and without exception, all correctly anticipated the need for this second instance. Only two of them were wrong in predicting that it would be a second round between Massa and Milei, while only one, on the contrary, was correct in this prediction.
It is to be expected that now, as happened after the primaries, when the polls did not anticipate the high vote for Milei’s primary, the polling houses will make adjustments to their methods and calibrate estimates for the second round. The determining factors for an effective calibration that allows obtaining more accurate forecasts in the future lie, precisely, in the adequate interpretation of the indecision and abstention of voters.
Subscribe here to the EL PAÍS América newsletter and receive all the key information on current events in the region.
#polls #failed #winner #elections #Argentina #essentials