and has a 19-point lead with liberals? interesting.

I think they get about 20 percent of the voters who actually do this because of the time commitment. Not saying this poll is wrong but it really is hard to predict Iowa.

Hillary 54% BS 34% MOM 7%

We know that some polls they run are paid for by Hillary's superPAC. That introduces trust issues.

polling is paid for by a campaign.

I was only speaking of this poll.

This is me being wary of polling companies which have recently accepted money from a campaign. Pretty simple.

I don't take well to calls for 'yes or no' questions as if I were in a court of law, so have a good day.

They offer a service. People pay for the service. Those people want to find out were things stand. If polls were not scientific, if they didn't follow best practiced the results would be worthless.

Which poll in the op was paid for by the Clinton campaign?

Just asking-is that how it works?

Has anyone noticed that for past 3 months?

They like Bernie. But they prefer Clinton. It's that simple.

EOM

EOM

... the definition of "voters" in this poll.

For example, if it only included people who voted in 2008 and 2012, then there's a whole bunch of "voters" who were excluded.

But then you knew that before you tried to avoid answering.

Here is a link to aggregate polling. It contains a veritable potpourri of polls that apply a a panoply of methodologies:


http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-iowa-presidential-democratic-primary


Perhaps there is a poll that meets the level of scientific scrutiny you have established.


I wish I could be of more assistance.

I supplied you with a veritable potpourri of polls that employ a myriad of methodologies:




http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-iowa-presidential-democratic-primary


If you find them all wanting and believe a systematic failure in random sample polling exists there is nothing I can do to disabuse you of that notion.

I did answer it. Pollsters employ a veritable panoply of methodologies to divine who will vote in the contest they are measuring.

But don't tell anyone.

is looking good

HILLARY AND TERM HAVE THE MOJO


IOWA 12/15 PPP poll: Clinton > Sanders w/ men 15pts; liberals 19pts**; women 21pts; moderates 22pts

PublicPolicyPolling ?@ppppolls 1h1 hour ago

Clinton leads Sanders in Iowa by 15 pts with men, 19 pts with liberals, 21 pts with women, 22 pts with moderates: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2015/12/trump-edges-cruz-in-iowa-his-supporters-think-japanese-internment-was-good-clinton-still-well-ahead-.html …

will go up?

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not claiming that Clinton is "inevitable'" nor am I claiming that it's "her turn." I realize full well that there is still a long way to go and that primary elections can turn quickly.

That said, PPP is a well respected pollster. Not only that, we generally know that Clinton has the far better field team in IA, and has hopefully learned from 2008 the importance of understanding the esoteric caucus rules.

Again, there's a long way to go, but a blowout in IA is a real possibility. If that happens, Sanders needs NH just to stay in the race, because SC is also going to be a blowout. And then, he needs to deal with the fact the the demographics of the Super Tuesday states heavily favor Clinton.

I'm not predicting anything yet, but I won't be surprised if this is all over within a month of IA.