The new CBS/NYT poll has Obama +14 among likely voters. The McCain camp calls the new poll improbable. At Hot Air, Allahpundit notes that it’s a “hefty outlier” and provides the pro-Dem party ID breakdown to provide some comfort (though admittedly while conceding it’s bad news).
Ah, I remember these games. Whenever a bad Bush/Kerry poll would come out in 2004, we’d learn from someone that the party ID was off, or that “likely” voters didn’t really matter this year. Or whatever. Opium for the massly deluded, that stuff.
Kaus pretty much had the best response. The day after the 2004 election, he wrote:
November 4, 2004. Bush 51, Kerry 48: Pollster Ruy Teixeira demands that these raw numbers be weighted to reflect party I.D.! ... P.S.: And they probably only included "likely voters"!
There’s two explanations for an unfavorable poll — (1) the poll is defective; or (2) your candidate is losing. I clung quite tightly to #1 throughout 2004 — you might even say I developed a problem. Seriously, I can quit
drinking relying on party ID at any time. No, I never look at party ID alone . . . with nobody else.
I’m not gloating about any of this. I — like every liberal here — went through this same water torture in the fall of 2004. It sucks. But take it from someone who's been through it, clinging to hopes of outliers and reweighted party IDs is just . . . well, a river in Egypt.