Alright, the primary polls are notoriously bad but let’s see how they do:
View attachment 218386
View attachment 218387
View attachment 218388
So, I think we have a decent understanding of just about where Iowa is, though not exact. So, my interpretation is the RCPs average did a much better job than 538s weighted aggregate.
So for some inside stuff on polling, 538 reweights polls to correct for error based on what their team sees as modeling errors on what the voter make up will be, ie if a poll weights for 25 percent under 29 year old voters it will “correct” the weight and recalculate.
RCP just averages the polls and I guess the theory is that with enough polls averaged the model is self correcting.
Whatever.
Obviously, both models overestimated Biden’s support, RCP by about 4 points. Also both models underestimated Buttigieg and Klobuchar by about 4 points. Everyone else 3 points or less - including Sanders who was just about right on.
So my take is the polls read where the progressives are going to vote pretty well but missed where the more centrist dem voters are going.
It will be interesting to see if NH goes the same way. It should be an interesting election considering Iowa is still in doubt. Also, Iowa turn was meh. That could be a fluke based on too many candidates but NH can provide confirmation of it not being a fluke if we see 2008 turnout.
There’s actually a lot to say about turnout, too. We saw a big drop off in low education and increase in high education voters in Iowa. This is looking like a Trump effect.