I kicked things off with this one:
This is another example of SUSA going seriously wacky.
Kaine is HIGHLY unlikely to get more that 48% of the vote, and Kilgore is HIGHLY unlikely to get less than 45% of the vote.
Potts is likely to get between 2% to 5% of the vote.
Congragulations Gabu, you were able to sneak a liberal into the Virginia Governor's seat. Its never been done before!
Oh, and did Kilgore get less than 45% of the vote (as SUSA predicted)?
SurveyUSA predicted that Kilgore would get 45%, not less than 45%, and they were within their MoE.
SurveyUSA was within their Margin of Error. You, on the other hand, were not in your prediction of Kaine failing to hit 48%. Everyone, polling companies included, are wrong on occasion. You were this time, and SurveyUSA was within its MoE. Just take the loss with grace. We all mis-call races every once and a while, even pollsters.
EDIT: I went to bed last night when Kaine was up only a few percentage points. Now I find that SurveyUSA underestimated Kaine's victory margin, and you are still attempting to paint this as a bias toward the Democrats? You are a braver man than I.
Alcon,
As I earlier stated, I erred.
So, go ahead and celebrate.
I STILL do NOT trust SUSA's numbers much more than I trust Zogby's.
Zogby did well in 2000 because of some unusual circumstances, NOT BECAUSE OF GOOD METHODOLOGY.
I want to look at the numbers before I state why the election in Virginia went so haywire.
I suspect that Boss Tweed in another post may have pegged it.
SUSA didn't do so bad this year.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/11/9/193441/208
