What the hell happened in Michigan?

[IceSpear]

I've seen a lot of theories floated. Most likely it's a combination of multiple factors:

1) She was never up 20+. Those polls were junk. She may have been up in the low double digits like Monmouth showed, or perhaps they were a bit off too and it was actually high single digits. In addition, no polls besides junky Mitchell were out in the field late, which was a similar problem that happened in Iowa this year. Polls were also wonky because there hasn't been a competitive Michigan primary in a long time, so they were unsure how to model it.

2) Bernie outspending her paid off.

3) Hillary supporters got complacent, and either decided to stay home or cross over to vote in the Republican primary because she already had it "locked up."

4) Bernie got a debate bump. Most people didn't think it would make much of a difference, but perhaps the voters thought differently. The trade portions in particular may have hurt Hillary.

5) Youth and independent turnout was much larger than expected.

Likely some or all of these conspired together to create the perfect storm.

[IceSpear]

WaPo thinks they figured it and and apparently it is all Howard Dean's fault...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/09/why-were-the-polls-in-michigan-so-far-off/


Basically the likely voter screens of pollsters were using models based on the weird 2008 race and were underestimating the number of men and young voters.  So in theory MI is an anomolie because of their issues with the 2008 election, which shouldn't apply to polling in other states like OH.

Lets see, the newspaper that recently ran 16 hit pieces against Bernie in just 16 hours is trying to convince people that some election 8 years ago screwed up all the polls in Michigan, and none of the other 49 states could be used as models? What a joke!

How many negative stories do you think they've run on Hillary Clinton? Probably like a thousand based on the email faux scandal alone!