Murray has now publicly apologized for this poll and hinted at an end to the Monmouth poll and the entire polling industry:
https://newjerseyglobe.com/polling/murray-apologizes-for-inaccurate-monmouth-polling/
“I owe an apology to Jack Ciattarelli’s campaign – and to Phil Murphy’s campaign for that matter – because inaccurate public polling can have an impact on fundraising and voter mobilization efforts,” Murray wrote. “But most of all I owe an apology to the voters of New Jersey for information that was at the very least misleading.”
The final Monmouth poll of the race, released last Wednesday, found Murphy with an 11-point lead over Republican nominee Jack Ciattarelli. Two earlier polls from September and August gave Murphy 13- and 16-point leads, respectively.
“Monmouth’s conservative estimate in this year’s New Jersey race was an 8-point win for Murphy, which is still far from the final margin,” Murray wrote. “More than one astute observer of polls has pointed out that the incumbent was consistently polling at either 50% or 51% against a largely unknown challenger. That metric in itself should have been an indication of Murphy’s underlying weakness as an incumbent.”
Murray’s op-ed went on to question the usefulness of political polling when the potential for error is so high.
“If we cannot be certain that these polling misses are anomalies then we have a responsibility to consider whether releasing horse race numbers in close proximity to an election is making a positive or negative contribution to the political discourse,” he wrote.
“Most public pollsters are committed to making sure our profession counters rather than deepening the pervasive cynicism in our society,” Murray continued. “If election polling only serves to feed that cynicism, then it may be time to rethink the value of issuing horse race poll numbers as the electorate prepares to vote.”
Interesting. I mean, what would a world be like without (public) polling?
