I am confused. Do we throw out the ones that we dont' like and accept WSJ polls that we do?
You know, the diarist probably has no idea what you're talking about, since that was a different person completely.
Nothing new there. The point seems to be that there is no base of evidence to support the corporate media meme that Obama is slipping, or that McLame is somehow stumbling toward the lead.
Even if he slips in the polls, they are failing to take a number of things into account. Number one, few polls actually track people who have cell phones. LOTS of kids out there of voting age who have only a cell phone. Number two, they are polling REGISTERED voters that they get from a list. They don't have some sort of secret database of all voters that is constantly updated, so they miss any voters that Obama gets added to the registers, a group that is pretty substantial in size.
The fact that each poll is different from those that predede it is another reason to look at them and shrug.
The best indicator of where McLame knows he stands is his incessant petty attacks. He wouldn't be discrediting his own image that way if he didn't see his campaign already spiraling down the drain.
Or not the only point anyway. The point is that the WSJ is desperate to spin this as somehow positive for McCain, even ignoring the vast majority of the data in their own poll. Notice how the article text focuses on the drilling argument that wasn't even part of the poll they used to support the article. Obviously they are hoping people won't click on the poll data link.
Additionally, if we believe the WSJ polls are likely to be biased towards conservatives, what does it say when their own poll shows Obama beating McCain by nearly every possible metric?
You are right here. When I read the article I had to search to find who was actually in the lead. They led with some subsidiary data which looked better for McCain.
on what the definition of "we" is.
