Will Newsweek and Time use correct sample in next poll?

[Quixote1818]

If they do or if they actually poll more Democrats than Republicans next time then it will look like Bush's bounce is gone and perhaps Kerry will be ahead. Well, actually in reality the bounce never was that big but this would certainly stop Bush's momentum in the water. Does anyone have any records of what percentage of Democrats and Republicans were polled in previous Time/Newsweek polls? It seems like they like to play with the numbers to create a perception of momentum. The question is do they do it both ways?

[napi21]

1. It's ratings! Who gets the most coverage, and best rtings!

Look at the coverage they got!!! Why would you think they would change in the future?

[rwheeler31]

2. No

Ugly as it is it will get worse.

[Ediacara]

3. I am not sure if this is what you're refering to, but aparently the sample

Was majorly off, and when corrected, yeilded a Bush lead of only 3%.

At least according to Rasmussen....

[tcfrogs]

4. From what I saw here yesterday, it wasn't that far off

Yes, they did sample more R's than D's. Not a "huge" difference, but a difference. Something like 370-325??? Without any explanation, unless you look in the actual issue. Don't subscribe to either.

[Ediacara]

6. I can't find said info on Rasmussen's page

But that's the straight dope from electoral-vote.com.

Seeing as almost everyone else gives Bush a nonexistant-to-very slight bounce, I tend to believe that Rasmussen is on to something.

Especially since... well.... how many times have you heard a pollster badmouthing someone else's poll? Something must be really fucked up for them to do that.

[Quixote1818]

5. I am wondering if they will turn the sample around next time

polling more Democrats then Republicans to even things out. If they do then it will look like Kerry has momentum.

[Ediacara]

7. I don't think they'll "fix" the numbers in that way

Just fix them so they're "correct" (if they do so at all).

[DeepModem Mom]

8. good question nt