[ambrose]

Past experience shows the Field poll notoriously tracks 10-15% off in favor of liberal politicians and initiative positions. They predicted Diane Fienstein and Kathleen Brown would both beat Wilson. They predicted close elections for props 187 and 209 both of which won by nearly 2 to 1. They also predicted that Simon would lose last year by 15% whereas he actually lost by only 5%. The truth may lie somewhere in-between, but if I had to bet I'd say the Eyewitness poll is closer.

In my opinion, the raw numbers of both polls aren't as important as bigger trends. Both show a small slippage for Yes on Recall, and a bump up for McClintock.

[Hugin]

Wishful thinking my friend. McC may have picked up some voters who previously supported Simon and Uberoth, but 15% or so is simply the hard core conservative base. There is no indication that he is picking up anyone outside that group, and much indication that Arnold is. I know many "moderate Democrat" and independent types who would never vote for a "right-winger"; they don't like Davis, are afraid of Bustamecha, but find Arnold acceptable. They make up the middle third of the electorate who decide elections. On single issues they often find themselves in agreement with conservatives, which is why "conservative" intitives on things like bi-lingual education, illegal immigration and affirmative action pass, but they are convinced that "right-wingers" are dangerous nuts who will outlaw abortion, poisen the air and water, turn us into a theocracy, and allow "big business" to run amok and "screw the little guy". Those people are never going to vote for McC no matter how much more qualified and competent he may be.