In response to:

Introducing The New Polling Firm of Madoff, Marist, Quinnipiac and Ponzi

Fred688 Wrote: Sep 30, 2012 12:59 PM
Pollsters are businessmen who must sell their product to survive. There are fundamentally two types of political polls. One is as valid as possible in order to allow the candidate to a) focus on the most productive issues and b) direct resources to those states where the electoral college "bang for the buck" is greatest. These polls must be as accurate as possible. Rarely are the results of these publicized, partially because the data they has utility to the opposition as well. The second type of poll is for public consumption. It is designed to rally the faithful (or discourage the opposition). These polls are the least credible as they are not in the service of objective truth but are to advance the objectives of the sponsor.
wsmith-84 Wrote: Sep 30, 2012 3:02 PM
Fred, but you have it backwards - the leader's supporters will stay home if they see their guy as a shoe-in while the trailer's supporters will turn out to vote if they believe every vote counts.

So perhaps the so-called "lame-stream-media" is, in fact, in the bag for R-money.

After a few weeks spent tracking down and questioning pollsters and the reporters of polls, I can assure the reader that pollsters are the modern-day alchemists. They promise to turn numbers into predictive gold. We'd all like to believe these magical powers exist, but we shouldn't. The pollsters of 2012 just don't know who is going to win in November any more than did the pollsters of 1980 know that Ronald Reagan was headed towards a landslide in that late-breaking year.

I'd like to believe Scott Rasmussen that the race between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama is tied. Democrats...