The American Research Group (ARG) gets a C-minus rating from 538 for reliability.

[pnwmom]

Something to keep in mind the next time you see one of their polls.

This is a useful page in which 538 explains rankings for all the pollsters you may be hearing from.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/interactives/pollster-ratings/

[DisgustipatedinCA]

1. So Clinton is actually ahead? Wow, I'm surprised to see you commit to that here

Want to make it interesting? I'm game.

[pnwmom]

2. Their latest poll has them statistically tied -- within the 5% margin of error. But there are

so many more reliable pollsters I don't see the point of posting anything ARG puts out; and I have never posted anything they reported.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

3. I've also never posted anything they've reported.

But, I've never been too wise with money, so let's just jump in and do it.

Bernie wins Iowa and New Hampshire: you donate $100 to DU.
Bernie loses both Iowa and New Hampshire: I donate $100 to DU.
Clinton wins one, Sanders wins the other: no money changes hands.

We don't have to do this, of course. Or we could do it at lesser amounts. But frankly, I can't afford a larger amount right now, and I don't make wagers without being able to cover them. You seemed very sure that the ARG poll is wrong, and while I don't know ARG, I'm willing to take the bet because I believe the Senator has a big groundswell working in his favor right now.

If so, great. If not, that's cool too. Please let me know.

[pnwmom]

5. I am only very sure that people should try to post reliable posters and not just anything

they see thrown up on the Internet.

Gravis Marketing is another one to avoid, and there are many others. 538's list is a useful one.

P.S. I have no particular expectations of the primary in Iowa because I live in a caucus state so I am sadly familiar with how unrepresentative they are compared to primaries. For example, my son, who is a Bernie supporter, can't participate because he's an out of state college student. They have no exceptions for people in his situation.

That's why most of the country switched to primaries -- because they allow a much larger and more representative group of the population to participate.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

6. So then...lets put a dollar amount on your certainty.

I'm ready to lose that $100, and I'm committing to that here in front of everyone. I just need your sign-off.

[pnwmom]

7. Please reread my answer to you above. I don't have any expectations that the result

in Iowa will be either fair or predictable.

[kath]

4. ..

[NobodyHere]

8. So Bernie could actually be ahead by a lot more?

[pnwmom]

10. No conclusion should be drawn from this poll either way. n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

9. This is actually a comparatively reasonable response.

Obviously you didn't read the memo to go full out over the top horseshit on bernie.
I think you would have to agree though that there is a real possibility that Clinton could lose the first two primaries and that that would be a major hit to her campaign and a huge boost for Sanders.

[pnwmom]

11. I agree. She could lose them and will have to continue to work hard.

But she's positioned much better in the south, so far, than Bernie was. And that's where Obama really overcame her last time -- though they ended less than 1% apart in the popular vote.