As a public opinion researcher, I ask why researchers don't trouble to educate themselves on really basic points about how polling works before criticising it on spurious grounds such as sample size. Sample size? Google "gallup literary digest 1936".
Increasing sample size does nothing to address sample biases. People who point to sample size *on its own* as a criterion for judging polls clearly have no idea what they are talking about. math.upenn.edu/~deturck/m170/…
This is not a matter of media bias (a real issue worth debating) or partisan preferences one way or the other. It is simply a matter of plain fact about what does, and does not, make for a reliable poll. Sample size is not a criterion to apply for saying a poll is reliable
And claiming, in ignorance of basic methodology, that it is, is an actively harmful thing to do because such an endorsement by credentialed academic authorities will encourage voters to give credence to meaningless twitter polls simply because lots of people have filled them in
