Deletion of Opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2008

Comment: these pages are useful and that is all that matters. I think some editors are interpreting wikirules too strictly, this is a classic case of 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What "Ignore all rules" means (WP:COMMONSENSE)

Comment: These articles present reliably sourced information, in a more straightforward way than could be accomplished with prose.  The content is clearly notable, factual, and meaningful to a broad readership, so assertions that it is "unencyclopedic" require further explanation. All that is needed to satisfy #STAT is some improvement to the prose which places the data in context—this is hardly reason to delete the articles
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: because Wikipedia is |not an index of external links or an indiscriminate list of things (even when those things are opinions polls about presidential elections).  This may be useful but it is not an encyclopedia article.  Move it someplace else
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: per #STATS, Wikipedia:NOT#DIRECTORY and Wikipedia:NOT#REPOSITORY. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Agree strongly with Coredesat's reasoning towards keep arguments
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: WP:NOT#STATS, and all lack context; this stuff does not belong in an encyclopedia, and there's absolutely no way to make sense of it. Most keep arguments above are , and any number of editors being involved in an article does not make it exempt to policy (the  argument that articles relating to presidents is absolutely ludicrous and should be discounted
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:USEFUL)

Comment: this is encyclopedic information from reliable and verifiable sources. #INFO can always be counted on as an excuse for deletion, and we are not left wanting here. Unfortunately, all of this information is rather clearly-defined and discriminate. This is an encylcopedia, and this is the information that belongs here
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: These pages meet the basic policies of , , and ; they are extremely useful; and they do provide more encyclopedic context than mere lists of numbers.  I think that they are necessary adjuncts to the main election articles, but might be convinced that a transwiki was appropriate if a suitable target can be identified.  However, unless obne is found this information should be kept
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:OR||WP:NPOV)

Comment: Here is the full text of #STATS
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)