[Doctor Stochastic]

The article seems almost as inaccurate as the polls in some ways. For example, the yes-no vote are described as though they were independent variables rather than correlated. The MOE's are incorrectly described for multiple choice polls (although the polls themselves probably do just as badly.) Additionally, the MOE only describes the statistical error in the sample; polling (as pointed out by the pollsters) is subject to greater error through systematic effects such as question wording, etc.

[Wolfstar]

...yes-no vote are described as though they were independent variables rather than correlated.

A potential voter has three choices on any ballot issue: to vote yes, to vote no, or not to vote. They are independent choices, and ALL pollsters give separate percentages for yes and no. Because they give separate predictions, each prediction can be tested against the MOE.

The MOE's are incorrectly described for multiple choice polls

In what way? A pollster says he predicts a vote of 55% for yes and 45% for no, and then gives a range plus or minus those figures within which he can claim to be accurate. If the actual election result falls within his MOE, he's predicted the outcome correctly. If not, he's wrong. What's so complicated?