I’ve not written about an in depth piece on the polls, but your experience nails it. It is an imprecise weathervane for measuring people’s opinions at best, and at worst a ouja board approach to society and consumer culture. Sorry board users.
There was a time, shown in Adam Curtis’ Century of Self and Vance Packard’s The Hidden Persuaders when pollsters’ sampling mirrored election outcomes. The varied reasons included people were more deferential to pollsters, they told them the truth; and social groupings were easily framed.
So what we get today is a legacy and poorer cousin of ethnographic and qualitative analysis, where binary questions cease to help us understand people’s complexity.
This is strong piece from the Wash Post, which riffs of one or two things I mentioned in my piece. It’s worth a read: A new theory for why Trump voters are so angry — that actually makes sense.
Ta for engaging.