In California, Rasmussen/Fox News had the worst polling record

[TeamJordan23]

Which pollsters called California's top races correctly, and which missed the mark?

In the final 10 days before the election, 14 polls of the races for governor and U.S. Senate in California were released by 10 nonpartisan polling organizations.

Those pre-election polls divided into two noticeably different camps.

One group, which included the L.A. Times/USC poll and the Field Poll, projected hefty wins by Democratic candidates Jerry Brown and Barbara Boxer. The other, which included polls by the Rasmussen organization and Public Policy Polling, showed both Democrats likely to win, but by much smaller margins. Some showed the Senate race in particular getting closer.

Republican candidates and strategists were, of course, eager to draw attention to the surveys in the latter group. The Republican candidate for governor, Meg Whitman, directly attacked the Times/USC poll in several speeches, saying incorrectly that Times polls always favored candidates the paper had endorsed.

In the end, Brown won by 12 points and Boxer by nine. The poll that came closest to nailing the results: The L.A. Times/USC survey, which had projected a 13-point margin for Brown and an eight-point margin for Boxer. Field, which had projected margins of 10 points for Brown and eight for Boxer, came in a close second.

The worst record? The Rasmussen surveys, which were conducted for Fox News and Rasmussen’s own survey website. Those polls projected a Boxer margin of three points and a Brown win by four.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/california-politics/2010/11/pollsters-california-hotly-contested-election-correctly.html

[xultar]

1. When bias bites back. tee hee hee

[NC_Nurse]

2. Ha! No surprise there...