Why were all the New Hampshire polls so utterly wrong? How did Clinton overcome such a huge deficit in the polls in one day?
Chris Bowers speculates:
This almost never happens. Here are some possible reasons:
- A last minute swing toward Clinton, as mentioned above.
- Clinton had a superior, momentum-proof, absentee voting program.
- Bad poll weighting. I wonder if pollsters were weighing down samples of women and Democrats in their surveys, both of which saw increased from 2004.
- Return of the lying white voter?
It is probably a combination of reasons.
In Iowa, exit polling said that women comprised 57% of Democratic voters, and went 30% for Clinton, 35% Obama, 23% Edwards. In New Hampshire they were likewise 57% of the vote, but it fell 47% for Clinton, 34% for Obama, 14% for Edwards.
Voters who said they made up their mind either today or in the past 3 days — 38%.
There could be many explanations for this, but Obama held his women voters — Clinton took them from Edwards. Did his pivot against her during the last debate and his comments yesterday contribute to what happened?
Update: MSNBC reporting that the Nevada Culinary Workers, who Russert said were absolutely going to endorse Obama, are now being encouraged by the national to hold off. Looks like Nevada is not a done deal after all.