Isn't ARG based in NH? IIRC, during the primaries, ARG's NH polls were notably less insane than their polls of other states. Maybe because they're local, they knew which polls to copy off of in order to get reasonable looking results (or, less likely, they actually know how to poll the New Hampshire primary). Doesn't necessarily hold up for the general election though.
They are, yet they still managed to butcher 2006 impressively. Not that hard to do with landslide races, but still...they're bad everywhere.
Yes, I was just thinking about the presidential primaries this year....which obviously isn't going to say much about how they do in the general election, I know. I'm just saying, in the NH primary polling, they were certainly off on the Democratic side, though not much more so than everyone else....but on the GOP side, their final poll actually had McCain by 5. That's amazing accuracy by the standards of ARG. Compare that to, say, their polling of Iowa, or Florida, or California, or South Carolina. They actually had Huckabee ahead by 7 in South Carolina a day before the primary was held, for crying out loud.
All I'm saying is that they didn't suck as bad in the NH primary as they did everywhere else. They were also reasonably accurate on the NH primary back in 2004:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Presidential_04/new_hampshire_polls.htmlThough again, it probably doesn't mean anything for the GE. I just figured I'd mention it.
