Meaningless 2008 polls

[bigdarryl]

This article is right the idea that Lieberman was ahead in a 2003 poll for 2004 is unbelievable. thats because no one knew anything about him except that he was a Vice Presidential candidate in 20000 http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/11/meaningless_2008_presidential_polls/
Meaningless 2008 Presidential Polls » Outside The Beltway | OTB

[zulchzulu]

1. I wrote about this a couple times...

Nothing new to me...

Polls at this point in the race are like crack. If you can imagine how political trends change in a drastic way overnight, you can imagine how a year away from the primary season is pretty uncertain.



Truman's victory is one of many classic examples where polls even on Election eve had him losing by a dozen points. That was overnight...so imagine a year away...

[mtnsnake]

2. Here on DU they're only meaningless because Hillary's on top of them.

If some particular poll comes out showing her near the bottom, the place will erupt in a collective orgasm, claiming how that particular poll just happens to be a very accurate barometer.

[wisteria]

4. iI will promise you, I won't do that! n/t

[election_2004]

5. Except for the Hillary supporters....

...who will claim that those polls are the ones that *CAN'T_POSSIBLY_BE* accurate, since their queen isn't at the top of them.

[wisteria]

3. Very good post. This should be required reading for all the poll pushers here. n/t