The polls that ate the presidential election
I’m comfortable on this limb, because out here it’s possible to see the race uncluttered by polling flak. The polls are so close that they don’t yield enough information no matter how cleverly we massage the data, examine the internals, or parse the turnout projections.
Let’s instead look back at how actual voters have behaved since 2009. In the first year of the Obama presidency, blue New Jersey and purple Virginia (which had gone for Obama in 2008 by 15.5 and 6.3 percent, respectively) held gubernatorial elections. A New Jersey newspaper described a Corzine rally Obama addressed on November 2, 2009: “‘I’m going to need you to knock on doors. I’m going to need you to make phone calls. I’m going to need you to do the same thing you did last year.’ The crowd, which Corzine’s staff estimated at 6,500 people, was on its feet for Obama’s entire speech, cheering and occasionally interrupting him with shouts of adoration.”
The Obama fans’ adoration notwithstanding, Republican Chris Christie defeated Corzine. Republican Bob McDonnell was successful in Virginia as well. Two months later, in indigo Massachusetts, an unfamiliar species called a Republican won a special election for the Senate seat formerly known as “Ted Kennedy’s seat.”









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
I think polls are the death of democracy. It turns an election from a debate of ideas, into a turnout battle. And that’s not what was intended.
lorien1973 on November 6, 2012 at 11:22 AM
This Mona person speaks the truth. Buh-by Barry.
BettyRuth on November 6, 2012 at 11:23 AM
I thought it was Democrat Party/Progressives inherent ideological bankruptcy and corruption that did that.
wearyman on November 6, 2012 at 11:39 AM
You can’t ban polls just because a few of them are either incompetent or malicious in their methodology, but like the “Truth In Labeling” rules that nanny staters love to push, there could be options that force pollsters to be up front about their methods and polling samples when they release their results. That’s still not going to get the low-information voters to look past the initial headline numbners, but it would put the D/R/I sampling up at the top of the reports, instead of being buried on Page 37 of the poll’s PDF file.
jon1979 on November 6, 2012 at 11:39 AM
Clear eyes, full hearts, go Mitt !!
bayview on November 6, 2012 at 11:43 AM
Ignore the polls.
Vote, even if the Black Panthers threaten you.
Schadenfreude on November 6, 2012 at 11:50 AM
We are holding the only poll that matters, today. All the rest, 100% of them, are trying to find some way to make money from the process. Polls are to elections what jelly donuts are to a healthy diet. You pay attention to them at your own peril.
MikeA on November 6, 2012 at 12:00 PM
The chicfilet day was all the polling I needed to see. That was a HUGE show of anti-obama thugary and tyranny polling right in front of our very own eyes, nationwide and organic.
karenhasfreedom on November 6, 2012 at 12:07 PM
..admit it! You (like myself) would love to go to that Philly polling place and get in those assshole’s faces. One could construct a scenario where we could also loiter around the entrance and give mean glares to all of the obvious Dems going inside.
It would be delicious having the election officials try to eject us as opposed to those goons and stammer forth with some goofy explanation.
The War Planner on November 6, 2012 at 12:10 PM
The War Planner on November 6, 2012 at 12:10 PM
Just the first steps. They’re lucky we’re not going there.
Schadenfreude on November 6, 2012 at 12:12 PM
Ditto.
Paul-Cincy on November 6, 2012 at 1:06 PM