Letters to the Editor
-
Polls: Telling Pollsters What They Want To Hear
I have never trusted polls. No matter who is doing the polling, pollsters tend to ask loaded questions, skew the responses to fit their particular paradigm and misinterpret the data. New Hampshire was a perfect example that had pollsters showing Obama winning handily, yet, Clinton won with a respectable margin.
People will sometimes lie outright to pollsters, i.e., say they will vote for Obama but, in reality, will never vote for a black candidate. They say they'll vote for Clinton but, in reality, will never vote for a woman. The biases of each voter surface in the quiet and sacrosanct voting booth.
With so many polls so all over the map, one may get a small sense of the electorate, but, not necessarily their exact intent. Even that hilarious "margin-of-error" caveat is ludicrous. Further, exit-polling has been shown to be erroneous for the most part.
With so many "undecideds" in Pennsylvania, the vote could be a whopper for Clinton and it could be a squeaker for Obama; guess we'll just have to wait until late tonight to see.