Does the DMR have any credibility?

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

The DMR poll showed Trump up 5, Rubio as a distant third, and Christie was the "#1 Governor". Actual Result: Cruz by 4, Rubio almost surpasses Trump for 2nd, Bush is the "#1 Governor".

On the Dems, result isn't called as of this post, but seems to be Clinton +0.5 or so. DMR said Clinton +3.

[Ronnie]

Poor Ann.  She seems like such a sweet woman.

[Matty]

Tweo straight primaries she has sh**t the bed.

[JonathanSwift]

The supposed "gold standard" of Iowa polling has been exposed as iron pyrite.

[pho]

Selzer's polling genius is a bunch of hype.

[Broken System]

I had a feeling, but I took Atlas' majority's word for it. Although, there are signs that the poll was crappier this time around. They didn't include their single-day results to show trends. In 2012, they did, and it showed a steep increase in Santorum's numbers every day they polled. So even though they weren't correct in 2012, it could at least be used as a tool to predict the outcome. This 2016 poll was crap.

[IceSpear]

Dem side was pretty solid if you assume O'Malley supporters jumped to Sanders (which seems to be what happened.) But yeah, the GOP side was a disaster. RIP Selzer.

[Maxwell]

Primary polling is always rough - voters are more unpredictable there than in real life. Her polls in the 2014 Senate election were dead on even as others predicted a narrow race.

[Adam Griffin]

She did very well on the Dem side - like has already been said, O'Malley not reaching viability likely shifted Sander's final percentage up by a point or so, which means she was off by less than two points (well within MoE).

Like I posted in the "Cruz intimidation" thread, he short-circuited the likely electorate to some degree with his VOTER WARNING social pressure mailer, thereby changing the likely composition of the electorate.

[Zanas]

Well, as for the Dems, the actual electorate might well have been Clinton +3. In fact, the exit poll appearing on election results pages at CNN and CBS points towards a 49-46 divide in the voters. That would mean that delegate allocation was actually favorable to Bernie, not the other way around. At the very least, it should indicate that pretty much all O'Malley supporters switched to Bernie and got him to a tie in raw voters which translated exactly in a tie in state delegate equivalents.