Have the polls distinguished themselves this election? Nope. Rarely have they even been close to the final result (most of them).
What has been the reaction of the truly hopeless media to this FAILURE? You will remember that Ohio was supposed to be CLOSE (Clinton won by about 12%--a LANDSLIDE)?
It is the same reaction that leftists have to an every more bloated and inefficient Federal Government: MORE POLLS.
As we come to the end in Pennsylvania, the media reliance on non-news polls has become alomst a caricature. Does it MATTER what the polls say in Pennsylvania? Of course not. It is absolutely stupid to say that either voters OR candidates should react to the polls, and not just because the polls have shown total unreliability this election cycle. It is obviously insane for voters to VOTE based on polls. More subtly, I think it is a disaster for politicians to rely on polls to "tailor" their activities and message (a failure of leadership, for on ething).
Yet, Drudge (yes, even Drudge--light years superior to outlets like AOL) is now carrying a banner headline to the effect that Clinton INTERNAL POLLS now show an 11% advantage in Pennsylvania. It really is hard to get more stupid than to consider that kind of "information" as "news".
If you read this blog, you know that WE SHOULD ELIMINATE POLLS (useless and meaningless, but vastly harmful to the political process in this country). Sure, we can do it (as I have repeatedly shown you). A Constitutional Amendement is not even necessary. The public just needs to LIE to pollsters, or at least refuse to cooperate. If enough people do that, it will become obviousl to the most dense that polls need to go the way of the Dodo bird and dinosaurs. Does the abysmal performance of polls this election cylcle, joined with an almost desperate concentration on them as the main means of "covering" this election, mean that people are taking my advice?
I hope so.