It turns out Republicans were right. The polls WERE biased, but not in the way they thought they were. Most of the polls actually had a Republican bias. Nate Silver (guy who called all 50 states correctly) gives the breakdown here

 

 

 

 

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/10/which-polls-fared-best-and-worst-in-the-2012-presidential-race/

I wonder if this is because they assumed a more active Republican electorate from the get-go

I'll add that it is odd that Republican turnout was relatively lower. You would have figured with all the "Le Patrie en danger" stuff going around Republican circles, they would have been more motivated to turn out. Perhaps because they were so disatisfied with Mitt?

The Gallup numbers especially look ridiculous.

ugh, that table needs to lose all the no name polls with less than 10 polls.  looking through the main polls, i think CNN actually came out on top... course, I could of missed one with this data...

I blame Donald Trump... He just makes the republicans look extra bad..

gergroy said: ugh, that table needs to lose all the no name polls with less than 10 polls.  looking through the main polls, i think CNN actually came out on top... course, I could of missed one with this data...

Soleron said: The Gallup numbers especially look ridiculous.

Among opinion poll pundits Gallup and their methodology is a laughing stock.

Huff post, along with Nate Silver called it right for each state. So over all the state by state polls were spot on. The National polls were the ones that seemed skewed by polling methods.

And for those blaming Republican apathy for Romney's loss consider this:

On the NPV Obama got way fewer votes in 2012 vs 2008 (7.4 million less), Romney got pretty close to McCain's numbers in 2008 (1.2 million less). McCain 2008 still would not have beaten Obama 2012. Bush 2004 would have lost to Obama 2008 by 48,000 votes. So don't go blaming Romney by himself for the loss.

It looks less like an issue with the polls, and more like an issue with not having time to do polling.

Hurricane Sandy seemed to be a big bonus for the president... giving him a ready made chance to look competent. Even Gallup's polls turned quickly on it.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-11-05/the-polls-shift-toward-obama

If there was time for said data to be imput in other polls, I imagine there would of been a change.

It looks like Sandy either convinced a lot of people to go out to vote or took a lot of wind out of Republican sails.

Chris Matthew's crude remarks were probably the correct ones.

Taking polls from the last 21 days is a bit strange. I would have used them from the last week, where a lot of polls were picking up a late Obama surge.

GameOver22 said: Taking polls from the last 21 days is a bit strange. I would have used them from the last week, where a lot of polls were picking up a late Obama surge.

>arguing with Nate Silver about polling data.