The latest polling says, “if the election were held today, President Obama would lose to at least two of the Republican hopefuls.” Oh yeah? I’m a bit fatigued by fiction and over-speculation, yet what I know is that if you say something enough times, people will believe it.

This oft repeated phrase heads the news cycle every three to four weeks. We seem to instinctively pay it some attention. Our ears perk up, and depending on the reporting numbers (yes, we understand numbers), our countenance changes accordingly. Whether it be the national debt, Medicare, war, God or election politics, polls dictate our beliefs. Isn’t it a shame that I pegged you?

There are two points that immediately came to my mind when I heard that statement: “if the election were held today, President Obama would lose to at least two of the Republican hopefuls.” First, the election isn’t being held today; therefore, the poll is simply a conversation-starter and money-maker. I don’t know how much Quinnipiac or Gallup gets paid to compile these numbers, but when we get down to brass tacks, data based upon fictional results are worthless. I’d like to say, a snapshot of the electorate can be garnered from polling a sample of the population, but I strongly disagree with that premise.

Let’s use the “Obama would lose…” scenario. I’m a low-income voter from a city and district that overwhelmingly voted for Obama in 2008. My not-a-state, the District of Columbia, has more citizens than the state of Wyoming. I’m fairly active in the political realm. I have never been called by Quinnipiac or Gallup. None of my friends or relatives has either. I’m not mad about it. Some of my friends and relatives are among the ranks of government workers, union members, the unemployed, clergy and the business community. Why wouldn’t their view matter in a national discussion? I am dismayed that people take real stock in non-representative polls.

What we know about political polls is that in election politics, military moves garner generous gains in the polls. Although Obama may be vilified by Republicans, conservatives, or racist Republican conservatives, he knows how to play politics. He may not be white (despite having a white mother), but he understands how whites play the game. Aggressive military action wins elections for incumbents (think Reagan and Bush 43). The right-wing attacks on Obama’s weakness regarding national security issues vaporized with the Somali pirate take back in April 2009 and again in February 2011, the maintenance of Guantanamo, and the now legendary hunt and killing of Osama bin Laden.

Will Obama’s poll numbers shift favorably in the wake of the bin Laden killing and even billionaire Donald Trump’s “carnival barker Barack certificate” fiasco, given that his stumping on more relevant issues such as budget cuts (on poor people) and ridiculous gas prices have not? Are you convinced by polls that say the president is more unpopular today, even though he’s broken his own back bending over backwards to compromise with vindictive Republicans? At the time of publication, just a few days after the killing of Osama bin Laden, the news reports an 11% increase in Obama’s poll ratings, up from his all-time low of a 34% approval rating.

What the Washington Post, Quinnipiac, CNN, Gallup, Real Clear Politics, and other media outlets do is take poll releases from various polling groups in a certain time range, and aggregate them to find a sort of consensus. How can that be good?

If your intention is to accurately reflect the opinion of the general public, then how can you do that without taking the pulse of the “nooks & crannies” of society? To ask high-income people how they feel about cutting Medicare - when they’ll never need it - is like asking poor people how they enjoyed their last glass of 1941 Inglenook Reserve fine wine. Their answer would be an uninformed one, thus making the poll worthless.

I like the way blogger, D.J. Drummond put it: “It’s a bit like saying that if you take everyone’s favorite version of spaghetti and mix them all together, you will get a really great-tasting batch of spaghetti. The odds are you will get a mess which won’t be worth the effort, and that’s what happens when you mix poll results. Polls, it should be noted, are the product of the groups and agencies which create them, and reflect a specific methodology which is usually similar to that used by other polling groups but not exactly. That difference is why the two results cannot be mixed with confidence, and the more polls that are mixed, the less reliable would be the resulting report.”

So I ask, “Who paid for the poll that guides your countenance?” You ought to ask that too. Whose interest is fulfilled by the results of the poll in front of you? I saw two polls asking virtually the same question about an impending election; one conducted by The Huffington Post and the other by The Heritage Foundation. Guess the outcome. If you guessed ‘two totally different sets of poll data,’ you’re right. So who’s lying? No one. It depends upon who you ask.

My advice is do not be led by people who care nothing about you - yet seek to extract everything from you. They’ll lead you off the edge of the cliff every time. It’s important to be informed, but polling is more often than not, misleading - with a targeted agenda.

I can’t wait to see your poll. If you live in a black community, ask people in and around it, “has America eradicated racism?” Your polling numbers will likely show your respondent’s pessimism. Conversely, if you were to ask that same question to high-income whites, the numbers of “no opinion” respondents would likely be higher, and you’d likely receive more responses denoting an optimistic outlook, that is, America is actively and honestly making strides in achieving racial equality.

Polls are subjective data tools than can be used against you. Remember that precaution the next time you hear “a newly released poll found that…” Chances are, no one ever asked you!

BlackCommentator.com Columnist, Perry Redd, is the former Executive Director of the workers rights advocacy, Sincere Seven, and author of the on-line commentary, “The Other Side of the Tracks.” He is the host of the internet-based talk radio show, Socially Speaking in Washington, DC. Click here to contact Mr. Redd.