Make your final call- will the NH polls be more or less off than Iowa polls

[Matty]

Go!

[Mike Thick]

I assume that they'll be roughly the same level of offness.

[RI]

Less as primaries are easier to poll than caucuses.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

More. Huge fraction of undecided plus crossover voting.

[Pandaguineapig]

Much more, new hampshire has not been accurately polled since before the Reagan era

[Coolface Sock #42069]

More. Polling is usually less accurate than the Iowa polls were. Also, New Hampshire is a smaller state than Iowa and also has less people.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Less on the Republican side, since the polls were pretty bad there in Iowa.

[Xing]

I'm going to say more on the Republican side, less on the Democratic side.

[Mr. Morden]

Less on the Republican side, since the polls were pretty bad there in Iowa.

Yeah, but on the GOP side this time, the Saturday debate may have changed things somewhat, and there hasn't been time for that to be reflected in the polls.  (Or, it's been reflected in some of them, but it's hard to know what to do with polls taken on Super Bowl Sunday.)

Also, more candidates in the running for second place this time, so more possibilities for the voters to surprise with tactical voting.

[Mehmentum]

This implies that the polls have reached any sort of consensus in New Hampshire.  So I chose the 4th option.

[Torie]

NH is really fluid. I know as a NH voter I would be a basket case and this point if intending to vote on the Pub side. This one is a really tough call for the sane and informed. So the polls may be junk. It just depends on the mood of the voters in a few hours. I know as time goes by since Saturday, I get more and more down on Rubio as it all sinks in. And then where to go? Yikes! So that is that.