I am always suspicious of polls. In most major elections, if there is a surge in voter turnout by

[mfcorey1]

minority communities, it usually impacts the results. However, most polls do not reflect contact with these communities. The numbers that are being thrown about for Obama a more a reflection of how MSM outlets fall in line behind each other to give news on the same results.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Uben]

2. I believe all polls are skewed......

...mainly because those that host them are skewed by their own opinions and it's reflected in the way they ask questions, which in turn skew the outcome. Take them all with a grain of salt.

[karynnj]

5. This can definately be the case, but you can find the acctual question asked

on pollingreport.com - a nice site that collects and archives polls.

[mopinko]

3. i think that polls are bought and paid for. i think they are

#1 weapon of those that seek to create an artificial consensus in this country. why do you think the media pounds on them? why do you think the media reports little but the horse race?

because we are pack animals, that's why.

[ifyousayso]

4. I agree about suspicion of polls

I agree with your suspicion of polls. I am also very suspicious of statistics people claim when they don't give the source.

[Freddie Stubbs]

6. In 2008, polls predicted a larger margin for Obama than what he actually got:

http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2008/11/the-list-which-presidential-polls-were-most-accurate/