[finnigan2]

"Time and Newsweek risk being over shadowed by more reputable polling. Especially if other polls settle in at a 7-8% lead. "

- I'm no statistician, but the over-weighting seemed to be producing about a 3% increase in the spread between Bush and Kerry. In other words Time and Newsweek were showing about a 11% spread when in fact it was closer to 8%. This 3% difference is within the margin of error for such polls so even if a more reputable poll came in at a 8 or 9% spread, they wouldn't be too embarrassed - the difference could be explained away as merely a sampling deviation.

[ShandaLear]

So, do you think turning this into somekind of conspriacy theory may be jumping the gun a bit?

[Southack]

"I'm no statistician, but the over-weighting seemed to be producing about a 3% increase in the spread between Bush and Kerry. In other words Time and Newsweek were showing about a 11% spread when in fact it was closer to 8%. This 3% difference is within the margin of error for such polls so even if a more reputable poll came in at a 8 or 9% spread, they wouldn't be too embarrassed - the difference could be explained away as merely a sampling deviation."

Nice point. They skewed the poll as much as they could safely get away with: 3%. Our 11% lead is really only 8%.

5 Legislative Days Left Until The AWB Expires