So are they really going to keep her sequestered for 60 days?

I mean, if she won't do any interviews, surely the media is going to get pissed, right?

Yeah, probably not.

I don't consider myself an expert, but those seem like good numbers to me. Due to the greater numbers of Democrats than Republicans, McCain has to win over independents; an even break in that poll -- which doesn't even signify an increase in voter support -- is far short of what's necessary for McCain, although probably more than Romney would have gotten.

My wife and a couple of other Obama supporters thought her speech was great-but-scary, disliking Palin themselves but fearing that it was effective. So they'd fall into the "net positive" camp, though it would never occur to them to vote for her.

And I still think the slogan should be: McCain/Palin: Because McCain Really Hates Romney

Once again I have to say---this focus on topline numbers without ANY looking at the fine grained stuff is just ridic.
Also---are the numbers saying they liked her speech or that they are now more likely to vote for her or see her as presidential? The folding of those two issues are just not wrong as interpreted by Eric.

I am hoping to see the breathless reporting of McCain's speech poll numbers about him being a warrior for peace and non partisanship tomorrow.

What they do not realize because they are chronically deluded is that she and McLoveMeBeforeIDie will consolidate their power at the expense of the American people the day after they say "I do".

They are rapists, panderers, whores, masters of nothing and above all, without regret.

She drew huge numbers because she'd become an instant CELEBRITY. People weren't evaluating the pitbull with lipstick as President.

Let's hear more about those 5 or 6 college switches and her shutgun marriage and let the mud flow until some of it sticks.

Huckleberry says we love her because she has good judgement? Somebody put that in the can. We can use that one later.

God, what a bunch of fucking idiots.

>a respondent can say she's a solid campaigner and still intend to vote against her.

I think the numbers make sense.

I'd rate her speech as effective, too, and herself a solid campaigner. That said, the overall impression is that of white trash. Washed and groomed for the occasion, smart in her own way, not to be ignored white trash.

The speech prompted me to 1) donate 2) lose whatever remnants of respect I had for McCain.

(and lay off Eric, will you? He's not making the numbers. He reports them.)

Sadly, we live in a cynical country and that is exactly why McCain made such a cynical pick in Palin. But this registered Independent will not vote for McCain. Americans need to wake up!

Peggy Noonan said it best, 'Narratives are 'Bulls%*t.' To many people in Americans go for the narratives and not the story line.

during the Hillary-Obama battle, the author of this "story" wrote others "stories" just like this one--reports on polls with breathless, inane commentary. Send him to WaPo!

correction:

Sadly, we live in a cynical country and that is exactly why McCain made such a cynical pick in Sarah Palin. But this registered Independent will not vote for McCain. Americans need to wake up!

Peggy Noonan said it best, 'Narratives are 'Bulls%*t.' Too many people in America fall for narratives and not substance.

seriously people, do you really think that after this long battle between hillary and obama and now between obama and the bush regime, that any living and breathing creature with half of a pea size brain, is really independent? "independent" is the new shield...it replaced "not enough experience, so no to obama"..it replaced "he is elite and can't relate to blue collar"...it replaced he has no foreign policy creds", it replaced "he is too exotic"...it replaced "he doesn't wear flag pins".....

this is damaging b/c it makes it appear that real independents (those who in my opinion are open-minded, experimental/creative in thinking) are idiots..they are not! independents usually challenge both parties to see and think outside of the box...

my bet says those so-called "indy's" are nothing more than Dems who cannot see themselves voting for obama and republicans who really wished they had an "easier on the eye" type of Dem to support....palin makes it ok for all of them to vote against their interest b/c they can say that they are doing a public good and making history by voting for a woman, even if she is unqualified...they don't have to feel bad for voting against obama and negating the historical nature of this presidency....they couldn't stomach mccain alone, but palin makes the pill easier to swallow....

yes sire....i daresay that's the majority of our "indy's" who are still on the fence...a few real indy's in there, but my bet says there are more Dem and a few repubs buffing up that indy stat!...real "indys" tend to be issue-based voters who cross party line and vote in the best candidate..now tell me what has mccain given any of us, DEM, REPUB and Independents to chew on? nothing except POW stories and now we have Palin for snarks...obama is not god, not our savior...

that is why i get up everyday and i do what i can to support this superior team who vow to lead us into the 21st century..but bradly effect is alive and well.....any excuse is a good enough reason to sentence ourselves to more bush years....at least we can justify this one with a FIRST WOMAN VP sham!!

cynical? yes and i have every right to be...when i look at the superb campaigning, the positive message, the detail roadmap to achieving the plans, the hope in the majority of our faces, the zeal in our efforts to support this "change" and yet, obama/biden still stand to lose, not on the issues and their offered solutions to solving some of these problems, but on a technicality based on "division/bigotry/racism and fear", it makes me sad!

i enjoy reading all of your positive posts, but i have to keep the truth and reality of america in perspective....we cannot afford to become too complacent and assume that good policies and staying above the fray politics will win this...if that was the case, kerry and gore would have won...repubs know how to win elections...

for those who believe in god, only a true divine intervention will part this red sea and allow obama/biden to wade through the muck!

The speech was the easy part. She's suppose to do well. Now comes interviews from reporters not hired by US Weekly. Someone without national exposer is typically a gaffe waiting to happen.

http://pufferfish.typepad.com/

60% of Americans think Al-Qaeda was in Iraq before the war. 60% of Americans cannot name both of their state's senators.

And, of the independents who gave her an "A," 84% described themselves as conservatives.

The data is full of other little gems like that, if you're bored enough to read them. But it's fairly easy to see that there are a lot of problems with drawing any sort of conclusions, good or bad, from this survey.

Throughout my voting life of 38 years, I was an independent, or more appropriately, an unaffiliated voter. However, I was reliably a Democratic voter. A few years ago, relentless Republican nastiness made me decide to register as a Democrat to make my loyalties clear. So, as the earlier post alleged, I'll bet that the overwhelming majority of independents polled for approval of the speech were in fact Republicans in all but title. Will Palin pull independents into the McCain column? In the strictest sense, probably, but only those who were already Republicans in all but name. I can't see any independent who tended to vote Democratic, deciding that McCain is the one for him because of his Veep choice.

i'm getting worried.

Something is wrong with that SUSA poll:

Did you hear Sarah Palin's speech at the Republican National Convention last night?

75% Yes
24% No

75% of Americans did not hear the speech.
75% of Indepdendents did not hear the speeach.
What is this group representative of?

Something seems wrong with the SUSA poll that, frighteningly claims that independents and moderates have been strongly swayed favorably by Palin's speech.

The Claim:

Overnight, the percentage calling the Alaska governor an asset to the campaign climbed 13 points; the percentage calling her a liability fell 17 points... among moderates, who 24 hours ago viewed Palin as a liability by an 11 point margin; today, Palin is seen as an asset by an 18 point margin.

The Problem: Question 1: "Did you hear Sarah Palin's speech at the Republican National Convention last night?" 75% answered Yes.

Am I right to be calling b.s. on this...?

No way 75% of a truly representative sample of registered voters, independents or moderates, heard Palin's speech!?!? The ratings were good but they were not that good!

C'mon... this cannot be valid representative sample of the general American voting public, independents or moderates? It has to be skewed to those predisposed to want to tune in, oversampling those predisposed to be swayed favorably, those already Republicans or Wingers.

796 ot of 1061 in survey say they heard the speech.
75%!?!? WTF?!?!
The Superbowl and the final episode of MASH combined did not do that good.

The only methods explanation I see is:

Filtering: SurveyUSA interviewed 1200 adults in two separate surveys, on 09/03/08 and 09/04/08. In each survey, those identifying themselves as registered voters were asked the questions which followed.

FYI - other demographics of poll group = Overall% (Heard Speech%):

Male = 48% (49); Female = 52% (51).

Age: 18-34 = 29% (26); 35-49 = 28% (29); 50-64 = 26% (26); 65+ = 18% (19).

Race: White = 76% (78); Black = 10% (9); Hispanic = 8% (7); Other=6% (6).

Party affiliation: Rep = 36% (40), Dem = 33% (29), Ind = 26% (27).

Ideology: Con = 34% (39) Mod = 38% (38) Lib = 14% (12).

Income: $40,000 = 70% (72).

Region: Northeast = 19% (19) Midwest = 23% (22) South = 36% (36) West = 22% (23).

Now, I suppose they did some statistical adjusting. Maybe. Perhaps.
But if the original sample is hopelessly biased in the statistical sampling sense, then it is B.S.

Right?

Is this poll invalid or what am I not getting that validates it?