Feingold internal poll shows 48 to 48

No, really. Go see for yourself.

I’m much reminded of this catch from Jeremy Shown. I’d call this release by Feingold right on schedule.

P.S. Do you notice anything odd about that release from the pollster?


  1. Randy in Richmond says:

    This doesn’t pass the smell test. First of all I doubt that FM3 contacted the Feingold campaign with a PDF transmission. And it doesn’t read in the language a pollster uses when discussing results from a poll such as this. Neither do they give the parameters of the poll. Plus I don’t know that I have ever seen a poll with a split time frame of 4 days.

    But here is the real kicker. Both Rasmussen (52-45) and Reuters (51-44) took polls in the same time frame and each independently show Johnson ahead by +7 points.


    This poll is a wish list to make news rather than report accurate findings. It is the action of a desperate campaign.

  2. Uh huh.


    polls are political caused the pollsters are paid by candidates. but the 50/50 feingold/johnson poll is accurate.

    after living 60 years of political intrigue i have never been polled. and have never had a person tell me the same.

  4. Randy in Richmond says:

    So then Dick, you are saying that Ramussen and Reuters are each, in seperate polling, 7 points wrong ?

  5. i said what i said. the polls showed pres truman lost. polling is a business to make money and some are influenced by their own political nature. give me the CV of these sacred pollsters, their owners, board of directors, financial statements and employee background info, just like the bank get our life history, except they are public and we are private. BTW what candidate/s did you ever realy help ?

  6. my question applies to them all, rasmussen, reuters, gallop. etc. they are nothing to me until i know who they are.

  7. the green bay packers dont know how to get 3 pts so how can we know how the pollsters get 7 points. looks like a las vegas spread, which BTW is also in on the pollitical equation.

  8. I’ve been polled half a dozen times this cycle alone.

    Feingold’s claim is bunk.

  9. Barnaby Jones says:

    I saw a poll with Feingold up by 3 points, but they took out all the Republicans.

  10. I’ve been told one CNN poll showing a big spread had no results in the 18-35 crosstabs. The race will likely be closer than expected but still a loss for Feingold.

  11. Randy in Richmond says:

    This “let’s make up an internal poll” has apparently become a Democratic campaign for the desperate. In Pennsylanvia, Repulican candidate Pat Toomey is ahead of Democrat Joe Sestak is the latest national polls, and ahead in the RCP average by 7.8 points.


    However, Sestak has released an internal poll showing himself up by 3 points, a ten point difference.


    As in the case of Feingold each of these acts of desperation illustrates that left thinking mantra– form over substance.

  12. One poll means little. Several polls with the same wording are a little more useful. Separate organizations doing several polls are better.

    All polls have problems which is why we actually vote and just don’t take a poll.

    Polls can be so variable. Mr. Steinberg’s analysis agrees with my own, for the most part.

    Did I notice anything odd? No cross tabs. Useless for analysis and I hope the Feingold campaign got more than that.

  13. Oh, it’s much simpler than that. Look at the strange and poor resolution for the logo but the very crisp text. It looked like it wasn’t actually printed on a letterhead, but rather, an old letter was scanned and cleaned and the new data put to it.

    I found it very odd. Maybe it’s just the old secretary in me, but a memo like that would have never left any office where I ever worked.

  14. Oh, that. Well, sure, I saw that right away (Not). But you’re right.

  15. Randy in Richmond says:

    Did you also catch this statement:

    Among all likely voters Feingold continues to lead Johnson and has since the middle of
    last week.

    As most pollsters predominantly use ‘likely voters’, why were these results not displayed or touted ?

    And Johnson’s first name is…. ?

  16. Dan R (formerly Dan not the other Dans) says:

    “an old letter was scanned and cleaned and the new data put to it.”

    Cindy, are you suggesting the poll is fraudulent.

  17. No. But I am suggesting this wasn’t your normal reporting.


    Maybe I’m wrong and it’s just sloppy work. The document’s author, Jonathan Brown, indeed appears in the company roster.

    After digging around on the pollster website, it looks like they just need some help with resolution.

  18. Randy in Richmond says:

    New poll out shows Johnson ahead by only +2 points.


    I agree with Sarah Palin when she told a crowd recently that:
    ” they couldn’t “party like it’s 1773″ until Washington was flooded with like-minded conservatives.”

    Don’t count them chickens.

  19. That St. Norbert poll is notoriously bad. Don’t buy it. Small sample taken over 10 days.

  20. I just don’t know on this one. Russ is tough and could eek it out in the end.

  21. Feingold is exceptionally tough. If Obama has managed to pull voters from the inner city, Feingold could win. They are notoriously under represented in a telephone poll.