When it comes to predicting who will be the winner of the Republican nomination, polls will not be a reliable indicator, said the National Journal's Charlie Cook.
In a column, Cook makes the case that polling results vary widely even when the question is the same.
"The field for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination is as flat as any in modern memory — pretty remarkable for a party that usually has a fight but almost invariably ends up nominating whoever's turn it is," he wrote.
"The flatness of this field combined with a system awash in money — with just a single billionaire able to keep a candidate in the race — should make for an exceedingly volatile Republican campaign, one that is absolutely impossible to predict."
More here
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
2 comments:
Has anyone noticed how wrong the polls have been the past few elections?
And how they tend to make the left look like they're doing better than they are?
Is that an attempt to discourage their opponents from voting?
Polls don't mean anything. The only poll that counts is the one on election day.
if they are going to nominate the next one who turn it is then it should be Rick Santorium. He came the closest to beating Romney.
Jeb wasn't even running last time.
Post a Comment