The Daily Beast is pure genius!!

[Non Swing Voter]

I am glad I read this very prescient article rather than follow the polls and Washington Post over the past several months (the post clearly has a liberal bias and distorts how the race really is going... same thing with polls when they aren't unskewed).  They would have distorted the election for me rather than present the reality in a clear and concise manner like the Daily Beast has!  Their predictions are all about to come to fruition.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/05/09/how-terry-mcauliffe-and-the-dems-lost-virginia.html

[ElectionsGuy]

Date: May 9th, 2013. Cuccinelli was leading heavily in the polls then. The race has clearly changed.

[Flake]

Date: May 9th, 2013. Cuccinelli was leading heavily in the polls then. The race has clearly changed.

[Holmes]

This almost reads like a krazen post bashing a PPP poll from 3 months ago.

[Non Swing Voter]

Reminder, this article predicted the Virginia race about as well as board GOP posters.

[barfbag]

I am glad I read this very prescient article rather than follow the polls and Washington Post over the past several months (the post clearly has a liberal bias and distorts how the race really is going... same thing with polls when they aren't unskewed).  They would have distorted the election for me rather than present the reality in a clear and concise manner like the Daily Beast has!  Their predictions are all about to come to fruition.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/05/09/how-terry-mcauliffe-and-the-dems-lost-virginia.html

You may not know this, but polls change between May and November. Dukakis also led Bush by 17. It's interesting to look back and see predictions and numbers though.

[IceSpear]

Date: May 9th, 2013. Cuccinelli was leading heavily in the polls then. The race has clearly changed.

Not really. Most polls always showed the race tight early on. This entire article is based off a single outlier poll.

[Non Swing Voter]

I am glad I read this very prescient article rather than follow the polls and Washington Post over the past several months (the post clearly has a liberal bias and distorts how the race really is going... same thing with polls when they aren't unskewed).  They would have distorted the election for me rather than present the reality in a clear and concise manner like the Daily Beast has!  Their predictions are all about to come to fruition.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/05/09/how-terry-mcauliffe-and-the-dems-lost-virginia.html

You may not know this, but polls change between May and November. Dukakis also led Bush by 17. It's interesting to look back and see predictions and numbers though.

You may not know this, but it's possible for journalists with an ounce of integrity (and board posters who aren't of your ilk) to make sound and reasoned predictions months ahead of time, rather than calling a race 6 months before votes are cast based on a single poll.  Hope this helps.