You have basically said all polls are off. None are to be trusted. Which is a “known” thing in many circles, but not in the public at large.
So how long till the polling business is hit with scandals?
That is not quite what I said, and the differences are meaningful. Most polls released to the public are released for specific reasons, often for deception. However, at least some of the public polls are (in my professional opinion) very close to accurate on what an election held tomorrow would produce. No information, including NYT, WaPo, FoxNews, Rasmussen, Gallup, CNN, and similar, whether polling or straight news, is to be trusted without at least evaluating the motives of the originator and the media spreading that information.
Despite all that, polls can be both accurate and useful. Take a look at the theme and unity of the Obama 2012 campaign - they have new themes every few weeks, and there is no unity in that fractured campaign. They are using polling, first to see which of the dozen or so messages they focus group is most effective, and then to see what that most effective message does when released to the general public. So far, polling tells them that every message has flopped spectacularly, so they try yet another new theme or message. Without polling, they wouldn't realize just how unreceptive undecided voters are to any message Obama's team has tried.
So how long till the polling business is hit with scandals?
We're like the newspapers, almost immune from scandal. We had that little 1948 incident with "Dewey Defeats Truman", and some more recent incidents with push-polling, so we're only a little ahead of used car salesmen in the public mind.