Posted on 02/02/2016 2:37:51 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Donald Trump led almost all of the polls leading up to Monday night's Iowa caucuses -- just ask him. He was in first place in the nine most recently conducted live-interviewer surveys of Republicans, going back three weeks. And a surge in turnout was supposed to propel the real-estate tycoon to victory.
It happened, but Trump didn't win.
Instead it was Ted Cruz, who had surrendered his polling lead shortly after the new year began, in first place when the first votes of the 2016 presidential nominating process were counted on Monday night.
In the Democratic race, Hillary Clinton entered the caucuses with a slight lead in the polling averages -- though results hinted at the possibility of the neck-and-neck race that persisted into the early-morning hours on Tuesday.
The GOP results, however, stand out as another failure of the public polls -- especially because it was believed that a big jump in turnout would benefit Trump.
More than 185,000 votes were cast at Republican caucuses Monday night, easily shattering past totals. But it was Cruz, not Trump, who won among infrequent voters.
So why did the public polls -- including the gold-standard Des Moines Register/Bloomberg Politics Iowa Poll -- miss Cruz's victory? There are some clues buried in the election results and the entrance poll conducted immediately prior to the caucuses.
The polls missed late deciders.
Iowans considered their decisions up until the last minute. According to the entrance poll, more than a third, 35 percent, of GOP caucus-goers said they decided on their vote in the final days of the race. But, for the most part, the polls didn't do the same.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
When do they get it right?
Uhm, yea...pollsters have always gotten Iowa wrong.
They had Trump winning from weeks ago
First, getting the polls wrong in Iowa is something of a tradition - its NEVER right.
Second, and more importantly, when is the last time that the GOP winner in Iowa went on to get the nomination, let alone win the Presidency? I guess that we’ll have to ask President Santorum that question.
Here’s a poll from the night before the Iowa Caucus:
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3391158/posts
Trump Leads Cruz by 9 Points in Iowa on the Eve of the Caucuses — 34-25%
Donald Trump 34%
Ted Cruz 25%
Marco Rubio 14%
Ben Carson 7%
Jeb Bush 5%
Rand Paul 3%
John Kasich 3%
Chris Christie 1%
Carly Fiorina 1%
Other 2%
Undecided 3%
Straight from the Commie playbook - procedural roadblocking.
I think the media is sort of let down. They were hoping for a Trump win.
The media are far less interested in the Republican slate than the Democratic, and the less they are able to influence the results, the less they care. Expect this to be a continuing pattern.
RE: Second, and more importantly, when is the last time that the GOP winner in Iowa went on to get the nomination,
Bob Dole won Iowa in 1996 and became the nominee.
George W. Bush and Al Gore BOTH won the Iowa caucus in 2000.
John Kerry won Iowa caucus in 2004.
Barack Obama won Iowa caucus in 2008.
Those were the last times.
Conclusion: Iowa does not necessarily predict the eventual winner or loser.
And here’s a poll from last week
According to the highly regarded poll from the Des Moines Register, Trump 25 percent to 22 percent, withd here’s a poll from last week
Selzer, touted as the best in the business has missed the candidate and number twice in a row. I have no doubt she is trying to get it right but her samples are not the same as actual turnout.
The only non-sitting president GOP candidate in 40 years to do so was George W. Bush.
Like Mike Huckabee in 2008, it may turn out to be Cruz's only victory.
There were two widely accepted possibilities - either Sanders OR Clinton was going to win, and the race between Sanders and Clinton resulted a third, in that they essentially tied.
He’s got Guam. I know it sounds silly, but they do have delegates.
Who tells the truth to a pollster?
Cruz cheated, announced Carson’s suspension during caucus, only needed four votes per precinct to pull it off.
Actually, per Nate Silver, for the IA Caucus (VERY difficult to poll) they were all within the margin of error.
They didn’t get it wrong.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.