The data doesn't lie, no matter how much voters don't trust it.

That was the message Wednesday from pollsters Kristen Soltis Anderson, a Republican, and Margie Omero, a Democrat, in an interview with the Washington Examiner's "Examining Politics" podcast.

Soltis Anderson and Omero were discussing the distrust so many voters have of polls that don't make sense to them, or of surveys that show the candidate they oppose winning despite all of the flaws they believe this individual has.

The two pollsters conceded that not all polls are created equal or perfectly accurate. But they said that if most polls are pointing in a particular direction — one candidate leading another, as is the case currently with Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump — voters shouldn't fight the results.

"This is why polling averages are wonderful, because even if there's a pollster out there that gets it wrong, they get a weird sample, something is funky, that's a pretty reliable sign," Soltis Anderson said. "I don't see any way that the polls at this point are skewed against Donald Trump."

Soltis Anderson and Omero said the concern about skewed polls is overblown if for no other reason than pollsters have professional reputations to protect. If their surveys are inaccurate, they'll go out of business. Voters tend to ascribe polling biases depending on the editorial leaning of the news organization that sponsors or pays for the poll.

"Underneath the surface are pollsters like me and Margie who have every incentive to get it exactly right because if we don't get it right we're out of a job; that is the free market at work," Soltis Anderson said.