Why the polls failed in Iowa — and why they might fail again in New Hampshire

Thirteen polls showed Donald Trump winning Iowa on the eve of Monday's caucus, only for him to pull up in a humbling second place behind Ted Cruz. With the results differing from the predictions to such an extent, pollsters are now trying to pinpoint exactly where they went wrong.

"It is really difficult to predict [the outcome] in a caucus state when there are so many candidates,” Notre Dame University political scientist Darren W. Davis told USA Today. Experts also admitted they had underestimated turnout among evangelical voters and confessed that the "angry electorate" was difficult to gauge.

GOP media consultant Brad Todd said, “Polling as a whole is becoming more challenging as it gets more difficult to reach voters in a random manner and keep them engaged for a full survey. Most media and university surveys are cheap and use methodological shortcuts that make them even more error-prone."

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

And it might be even worse in New Hampshire, a state that is "notorious for breaking late and people deciding late in the game," according to analyst Amy Walter.

Davis said the press hype surrounding the polls was part of the problem. "It really sets up pollsters to fail," he said, adding that in New Hampshire the public and press need to be "a little less excitable and a little more discerning."