Because he’s not a Christian, Catholic or Mormon. And Muslims don’t matter in US elections. In fact Pakis voted for Romney.
Aggregators got it right. And the bitching sounds familiar. Could be an “active” fund mgr speaking: “If we don’t do the polling these aggregators have nothing to put into their model, [but] they sit back and take the benefit of our hard work and our toil.
Already the number of state polls conducted this year was lower than last time. If everybody decides they’re just going to aggregate in the 2016 presidential election they’ll have no polls left to aggregate.”
Finally: “So I think as an industry we really have a little issue here about the virtues of doing original polling versus just sitting back and taking other peoples’ polls and putting them in models.”
Horrible possibility: if the geeks are right about Ohio, might they also be right about climate?
Daily Beast writer David Frum (@DavidFrum) examines the consequences of the 2012 election. Namely, if the statistical analysis so accurately predicted the winner of a tough swing state, might statistical analysis be correct on climate change predictions? (via BBC)