We were just talking about this at work around coffee this morning and reached the same conclusion as this article.

It keeps conservatives working hard.

IBD is a pretty good source. I hesitate to criticize their judgement without good cause.

I'd love to see Romney take California too. I'm seeing a lot of liberals that refuse to go to the polls Tuesday. It would be a hoot to see Obama lose in Ca too..

47%

As long as Obama is at or below 47% in these polls he loses. We are two weeks away from the best Republican showing in 24 years.

I subscribe to IBD. They are as anti-Obama as any newspaper I have ever seen. They hate what the guy stands for. They are NOT trying to prop up BO. In fact, I think they would be suicidal if he (not going to happen) won. Even Breitbart gets it wrong occasionally.

Even if you over-poll the Dems, you cannot offset the finding that only 84% of those who voted for Obama in 2008 say that they will vote for him in 2012.

A formerly trusted sites tanks itself, shoots itself in the foot.

If you read the article, you'll find out that the op-ed department is fairly conservative. Its news department, which includes this polling arm (contracted?), not so much. The writer compares its news department to the WSJ.

IBD's op-eds are definitely conservative. Their stories, overall, are solid and worthwhile.

Their polling methods are an ill-advised anomaly of an otherwise good news source, and it will probably come back to bite them if they don't re-think it, soon. Why they thoughtlessly assume a D+7 weighting is anywhere near reality is a mystery.

IBD has, hands down, some the best editorials going. You couldn't ask for a sharper, clearer articulation of conservative principles than they provide. The headline of this article is misleading.

IBD makes the WSJ read like the NY Times. They're the good guys.

I voted eary this morning in Dallas. They opened at 80 and we got there about 9:30. Short line which you would expect on a weekday with people going to work.

The poll worker asked me how I was doing and I told her I was fine and happy to be there but that I had mean't to come at 80 and be first in line.

She told me it was good I waited because they were out the door, down the steps and into the parking lot at 80.

This is a heavlily Republican area. That was encouraging news as well as the fact that while the line was short by 9:30, nearly every voting machine had someone using it. And this is the first day of early voting. Next Saturday, the only Saturday for early voting, is going to be a doozey.

After voting for Romney, I also voted AGAINST every spending plan on the ballot.

The boy president is history. Go Vote!

I said yesterday and it bears repeating. IBD, through it's polling relationships, is harming its brand among investors, who tend to take reasonable risk AFTER doing their homework. IBD's polls raise uncertainties needlessly. Investors abhor uncertainty, and they hate deliberate cooking of the numbers as well as plain incompetence. It's a shame.

Insofar as the impact of IBD and others on RCP averages go, it's no more complex than Garbage In - Garbage Out.

I cannot find the breakdown of party affiliation in the Gallop numbers anywhere. Anyone have that?

Tip o' the cap to #13.

Another aspect of the IBD/TIPP poll is that as of today, it's +2 Obummer, but with an MoE of 3.5%. That hardly lends support to the supposition that IBD is "propping up Obama".

Still criticizing, Flynn? The final IBD/TIPP poll showed Obama up by 1.5% and last I saw, that was the just about the exact margin of victory Obama won by. Facts are facts, and IBD's poll is vindicated.