Poll Tracker

Slate: What If We Banned Polling?

Opinion polling might be much worse than inaccurate. It's easy to imagine that the polls themselves affect the outcome of the elections they're supposed to predict. Voters may be inclined to jump on the bandwagon of a candidate who appears to be cruising to victory. Or they may stay home if they think their favorite is either out of the running or coasting to an easy win.

Washington Post: Accuracy of Polls a Question in Itself

Could the polls be wrong? Pollsters this time around will not make the mistake that the Gallup organization made 60 years ago -- ending their polling more than a week before the election and missing a last-minute surge in support for Truman. Still, there appears to be an undercurrent of worry among some polling professionals and academics. One reason is the wide variation in Obama leads: Just yesterday, an array of polls showed the Democrat leading by as little as two points and as much as 15 points.

Los Angeles Times: Rethinking the "Bradley Effect"

It has entered political lore as the "Bradley effect" -- the supposed tendency of some white voters to lie when asked if they support a black candidate, producing a bubble of support that isn't really there. More to the point for Obama, there is no evidence that one still exists. A recent study by a Harvard political scientist showed no sign since 1996 of an otherwise unexplained election day drop-off in support for African American candidates for governor or U.S. Senate.

Pew Research Center: Preview of Next Tuesday's Exit Polling

Joe Lenski, co-founder and Executive Vice President of Edison Media Research discusses his organization's plans for conducting exit polls on November 4, given this year's special challenges including expected high voter turnout and unprecedented levels of pre-election day voting.