[1stStrike]

I thought this was a very good interview that explained some of the faulty science behind most poll numbers. The author talks about how pollsters had Obama up by 10-11 in N.H., only to still lose to Clinton. Something I almost forgot about.

[Retired Greyhound]

Great interview. Shold be required watching for FReepers who live and die by the polls.

As many as 25-30% could still be undecided or influenced one way of the other. The polling companies force people into a decision.

Election day is all that matters. Voting is a gut check. Which is why I can’t imagine that Obama will win.

[6SJ7]

Didn’t Obama fail to carry most of the later primaries in larger states?

[Gen-X-Dad]

There was a guy on Glenn Beck last night who claimed that minority candidates need double digit leads in polls because people don’t want to come off as racist when asked if they support the minority candidate. Once they are in the voting booth, they don’t vote for the minority candidate. Apparently this is well known amongst pollsters and is the reason why they are upset that McCain is now leading or has closed the gap to single digits in many states.

[yazoo]

Important to remember that Obama won because of caucuses. Had all the primaries been regular voting he would have lost to Hillary. Caucuses depend a great deal on organization and less on popularity.