Well... Sam Wang of Princeton and Nate Silver can't even agree on if 2016 polling is volatile

[Godhumor]

Start with Sam:
In point of fact, 2016 national race is the least volatile since the advent of modern polling, 1952-2012. Standard deviation=2.2%, super low https://t.co/PYbYgUnU6o
https://twitter.com/SamWangPhD/status/779689165747286016

And then Nate:
This is mostly wrong… 2016 polls have been more volatile than 2012, 2008, 2004. Certainly not as volatile as some past years (1992) though. https://t.co/PZkYzhxbAH
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/779697287559778304

You know an election year is weird when even analysts can't agree on whether polling is volatile or stable...

[asiliveandbreathe]

1. Me thinks Nate should take a look at the stats

from Google - thru the 20th..some of the numbers are eye poppin' - and suspect to say the least -

- AZ +5, UT +4, AR +1,MT +4, OH +1, KANSAS +12, SD 1 - NJ T +1, T FL +13..it was the KANSAS number that caught my eye and made me curious....Sooooooooooo

Encouraged - but complacent....