Political Polls Plausibility Problem

Anyone else wondering how so much can be so wrong for so long in a sorry presidency and yet the polls show a tie?

What's really going on?  Sans conspiracy theory like suspecting the Obama regime of muscling or even buying pollsters results.  The more likely explanation is the simplest one.

Pollsters are statisticians.  They take 'samples' from the data pool and extrapolate the larger result from a much smaller number.  They try to gain a bit more accuracy by applying 'data points' from past elections, like the number of voters from a given party voting in a particular way.

The 'art' of polling is like other arts, the finished product is only as good as the artist's skill and talent.

Why then are the polls suspiciously wrong?  They missed the Wisconsin Walker micro-landslide, they got that one backward. They didn't get the full scope, scale and historical size of the mid-term flip.  And they appear to be off the rails again on the upcoming, all important November contest.

The 2008 election was abnormal.  A far larger number of black and regular Democrat party voters turned out to elect Obama.  And there's the rub.  The pollsters are using the lopsided voting in 2008 as a starter assumption for the next election.  Pollsters are not factoring in apathy and fewer registered Democrats that will not be voting this time.  And that, no doubt will factor back in on Tuesday, November 6th.

A new website has been developed to 'correct' the 2008 error regarding party turnout and voter apathy.  Appropriately the site is called   www.unskewedpolls.com.  The site has it right - Romney is between 5 and 11 points ahead.  And Obama's internal polling no doubt has given him the bad news.

Romney 14-Point Lead In Middle Class
Triple-Blue PA Shows Obama Ahead By Just 2-Points
MA Liz Warren Not Only Not An Indian But Not A Lawyer Too?
Obama/DOJ Gallup Scandal