I appreciate the narrative that breaks down the math for the layman. You showed admirable restraint in not judging the pollsters, as objectivity serves the purpose of your article, I believe. But what I take away from your conclusion is that the pollsters did worse than a random selection -- for all their bluster and arrogance, for all their advanced methods and fancy techniques, they were clueless on 2 of the last 3 elections and had serious gaps in the third.