The 2012 polling hall of shame

So funny how they pretend. Few things annoy me more in political analysis than the cherry-picking of favorable polls. That's why, with few exceptions, I dealt mostly in polling aggregates. But there's no doubt that my own assessment of the race was colored by which pollsters were saying what.

I obviously trust PPP. SUSA is good for the toplines, less good at crosstabs. Marist, CBS/NYT and ABC/WaPo are pretty solid. The internet pollsters'YouGov and Ipsos'were a curious (and ultimately successful) experiment. Pew is the gold standard, even when it's off. TIPP was a disaster in 2008, but it appeared more stable this time around. Some states have local pollsters so good they trump everything else, like Field in California and Selzer in Iowa. A few others were mildly interesting.

But there was a class of pollster that was so patently bad, they made me assume the whatever their results said, the opposite was actually true. So follow me below for a tour of this year's polling suck.