Not entirely true. The quality of the samples count too. Now I’m not defending anything here, I’m just stating that there is nothing inherently wrong with a sample size of 160. Just that if you do under sample there are other things you have to do to normalize the results across a broad spectrum of the state’s demographic (national polls are virtually useless).
Under ideal circumstances, perhaps.
But this was 161 respondents in 8 states. And the WaPo projected individual battleground state results based on an average of 20 respondents per state.
Bah and humbug!! The published "poll results" are meaningless.
But they served their purpose. Now a majority of Americans believe the election is irretrievably lost for Romney.