Not claiming fraud, but I want to know why ALL the polls were wrong.

[tridim]

Shouldn't the polling firms be required to explain what happened?

I probably wouldn't be asking this question if at least one poll was correct.

[Clintonista2]

1. FIRED UP! READY TO GO!

GoHillary!

[Emillereid]

2. Me too! Makes you wonder - dems can fix elections too.

[fadedrose]

31. How true (nm)

[RL3AO]

3. 1 poll was correct

but 30 were wrong.

[goodgd_yall]

Which one was that?

In Iowa it was the Des Moines Register's poll that was the accurate one.

[antiimperialist]

4. Most in 2004 were wrong too. Primary polls are inaccurate n/t

[Didereaux]

8. notoriously inaccurate to be accurate! LOL

[goodgd_yall]

5. A Hillary surge in the last couple of days?

Just thinking...

[tridim]

7. Maybe, polling data would show that.

[goodgd_yall]

22. Depends when the polls were done.

[spooky3]

6. Most of them had huge margins of error.

[Scooter24]

10. Exactly...

some as huge as 10pts.

Polling is NOT an exact-science. Too many variables can swing a poll.

[tridim]

24. Even with a big MOE the average of all the polls should still make a nice bell curve.

These results are statistically lopsided.

[bluedawg12]

13. That's correct.

Polls vary by several SD points and are not absoulute numbers.

Obama is giving a gracious speech- Hilary won this one. Edwards is fighting on. Bring on the repugs!

What a great field of Dems to chose from.

[goldcanyonaz]

9. Fired up and ready to go, for Clinton!

[jackson_dem]

11. They were right about the Republicans. I think it was race on our side

[ingac70]

12. The Hillary camp's own internal polls showed Obama winning...

apparently they didn't have good samples.

[Anouka]

23. So did New Hampshire lie, or was data thrown out that shouldn't have been?

What happened?

[ingac70]

29. ....

polls are only as accurate as the samples folks take. If the sample isn't as diverse as the state, you are going to get screwed up results.

Kinda like taking polls on here a few months ago and Dennis Kucinich winning them. When comparing DU to the whole of the nation, we are a bad sample!

[rocktivity]

14. I think it's a combination of under-sampling and cell phones.

You should always look for at least 1000 respondents and no more than a 3 per cent margin of error. Also, there are so many people who use cell phones only, they never get questioned in the first place.

I vowed to stop paying attention to the polls right after Iowa. Maybe they should be banned from DU at least until super Tuesday.

:headbang:
rocknation

[Sparkly]

15. Undecideds who decided in the last day or two went for Clinton. nt

[KittyWampus]

32. exit polls indicate it was women and those for whom economy prime concern. Men, younger voters

voted for Obama.

[Occam Bandage]

16. I think indies went to McCain more than expected.

[Anouka]

25. Could be.

Have to see numbers, though. We'll see.

[ben_meyers]

17. Cell phones! n/t

[mod mom]

18. Those rally turn out differences were a figment of your imagination.

[Lucinda]

19. They were weighing them for a larger Indy bump for Obama. All the polls I saw had them close

among registered Dems. And Hillary leading by as much as 3 points in some.

[Barack_America]

20. Because polls are designed for when two white men run against each other n/t

[terryg11]

21. maybe because they are just polls

and not results of actual voting?

[Yukari Yakumo]

26. Independents also.

They seem to have went and voted Repub (and McCain) than was previously anticipated.

[Citizen Kang]

27. The Bushies and the Clintons are working together!

You don't think if it can be rigged in W's favor that it can't be swung in Hillary's favor?

Hell, Bill practically told everyone the Bushies and Clinton's are working together when he said Hillary would send Pappy and Bill on a worldwide tour to "heal" America's image worldwide.


DUH!

I can't believe I fall for this crap every 4 years! Just when I thought our country might actually not be controlled by the puppetmasters, they pull the strings for another Bush/Clinton....

[petersjo02]

28. Margin of error

and large number of undecideds. Polls neglected to mention 17% undecided when they were trumpeting Obama's big lead. Obviously more undecideds broke for Hillary.

[SaveElmer]

30. My guess...

Perhaps they changed their models after Iowa...oversampled young voters...

Just a guess

[fujiyama]

33. They are garbage

Pay not attention to them or the media.

They both suck.

[Raine]

34. Yeah, how could they be so wrong and

by so much? Obama was supposed to win by double digits and instead he loses! :wtf:

[Zynx]

35. I think soft Obama support didn't show up and the undecideds broke big

for Hillary.