[ambrose]

I've been around, and we have hit established pollsters plenty. Just not every single time a new poll thread is posted.

I was also highly suspicisious of Rasmussen until he caught Edward's sudden surge - right before his strong second place showing in WI. No other pollster caught this.

Anyway, a tracking poll is most interesting for its trends since the same polling methods (whether flawed or valid) are used night after night. I

[Coop]

People often overlook two things: 1) Taking the word of just one pollster as Gospel - no matter who the pollster - is just not very smart. 2) National tracking polls in a Presidential race are interesting, and give a good indication of the national voting totals, but have next-to-nothing to do with the electoral college.

A variety of polls (Zogby, POA, WSJ, etc.) showed a very close national race in 2000. That's what we got. National totals: Al Gore - 48.4%: George Bush - 47.9%.

[LS]

Getting Edwards right in one poll is hardly a reason for celebrating Ras. However, I'm open. I hope he's right, because he consistently has Bush/GOP higher than most other pollsters.