All other polls show a stronger lead for Kerry. I'm looking at the guts of the polls and it looks like there was an oversamle of voters 65+

NJ: those are reg voter numbers; that poll also show a TIE in LVs (46-46), and it's a Q-poll, not Gallup, so they could be on to something-- Bush advantages on fighting terrorism, too, though Kerry advantages on all domestic issues. On the other hand, that makes Bush an incumbent at 46. MI: that's the same poll in which Bush has led all year until now; MI will go for Kerry by greater margins than NJ, I suspect. MO: good news, I guess, though it's a big expensive state-- easier to throw on last-minute ads in AR and WV, especially since we've got heavy hitters (Clinton and Senator Byrd) specific to those cheap media states. CBS: WTF? Should we email and demand that they release their poll? Will the NYT cover it in print?

So why the #$%% are they suppressing their poll?  No confidence?  wrongly weighted?  What is going on?

Mitchell is a Republican pollster and they are very biased.  They are the ONLY pollster that showed Bush up in MI (around +6 the two next days), so I guess that Kerry up by 1 is a sign that MI is NOT a swing state.

As for NJ, the Quinnipiac poll shows Kerry up by 5 in RV, so could it be another case of LV model run amok.  It is true that NJ has polled closer than expected for a long time, so Kerry will probably not win by 15, but most polls show him up at this point by 5 or 6 %.

Why is that implausible. Recent Florida polls show Kerry up 3, including SUSA and ARG.  Why is 4 so strange. If it was 9 I could understand but 4? That makes no sense.

Goddamnit, that better not be true.  Zogby didn't suppress his 49-45 Bush lead in FL from yesterday.  But, given the apparent fact that the results have already leaked, how COULD they suppress it without damaging themselves a lot worse from backlash than if they released it?  That is, operating under the assumption, one that I think is quite safe, that they would face major Dem outrage if they really did try to suppress it.  

...in Michigan and New Jersey.  GWB is toast at 41% (NJ) and 44% (MI).  And who really believes that 12% of New Jersey voters and 10% of Michigan voters are still undecided one week before Election Day?

E-mail the NYT at:

nytnews@nytimes.com
executive-editor@nytimes.com
managing-editor@nytimes.com

And CBS at:

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/feedback/fb_news_form.shtml

How can we write/call them on this poll suppression thing? What's going on with that?

If Democratic voters think the race is tied or that we are slightly behind -- they are only that much more likely to vote.  A "close horse race" story only ensures that the newly registered people that didn't vote in 2000 will be willing to wait in long lines to vote this time.  

If the alternative story is that Bush is winning the state in a landslide -- then by all means go ahead and slam CBS.  

Wow, the previous poll from Mitchell showed Bush up by 5, so Kerry's improved by 6 points in the Great Lakes State! Or rather, that pollster is just wack. And New Jersey is a joke, it's been getting screwed up polls all year. It's the California of 2004 (the last few polls of California in 2000 showed it tied, but Gore won it by 15 points).

And the CBS Florida poll surpression is really over the top. Nobody every surpressed absurd Gallup polls that showed Bush up by 13 or some crap. I mean, we get about four Florida polls every damn day, so it's not like it really matters, but it's a fact that they wouldn't hide a poll that showed Bush doing well.

Check out www.race2004.net to see how these polls fall into the picture for Michigan and New Jersey.... (and look into Mitchell's track record on that Michigan thing)  these polls don't mean a thing

 the surest way for Kerry to lose would be to divert energy from FL, OH, WI, IA and try to shore up support in the huge MI and NJ markets...
heck,  any resources left over would be better spent angling for upsets in NV, WV,  AR and CO than running up his margins in states where Bush has never topped 46% in a poll...

Really?  Ummm.  Doesn't that, well, fly COMPLETELY in the face of the "incumbent rule?"

My girlfriend actually pointed this out to me. If you scroll down the list of MI polls at 2.004.k, Mitchell Research has Bush leading until this point. In fact they have Bush up by 1 in almost the same period that susa has Kerry up 10.

There's no way Bush can win New Jersey with a 41% polling number.  

I can't imagine Bush winning NJ.  I don't think it will really even be that close in the end.

We have more than a problem with polls in florida.  Look at this:

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=GVNZWNIMI4OP0CRBAE0CFFA?type=topNews&storyID =6630631

or

http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/local/10023659.htm

Looks like they "lost" 60,000 absentee ballots!!

Why arent people being arrested??

I guess I can understand some surprise at a poll that showed Kerry up 9 in FL, I'd certainly have a hard time believing it (not that he's ahead, but that he could up by 9).  But, yes, what polling firm or media organization would hesitate for even a moment if they got a lead for Bush that big in one of the battlegrounds?  Who would even think about suppressing, re-checking, or even caveating a 9 point Bush lead in FL, what with all the media attention it would get them?    

CBS/NYT poll or not, Kerry is surging in Florida.
--Social security revamp making seniors nervous
--Flu shot screwup making seniors mad
--Newspaper endorsements (and even non-endorsements) ravaging Bush
--Big Dog is all over the front pages and on TV.
Dems in South Florida are waiting for hours in early-voting lines.  Crowds for Kerry are huge.  Color us blue (again).  

That's a bit odd.

Game... Set... Match... this state is as true blue as it comes. This state (my state) is on fire with anti-Bush emotion.

I think polls are important, to the extent that it can provide a picture which is not consistent with post-election numbers.  I think one of the posts here alludes to the news that 60,000 absentee ballots were "misplaced".  Here's where I think polls might come in very handy indeed...especially if there are 5-6 indicating the very same trend, and the election results then turn out differently, AND there are indications of voter disenfranchisement, which there already are.  Say most polls indicate Kerry ahead by anywhere from 3-5-8% points 2-3 days prior to election, then Bush takes FL (or OH), w/flagrant election violations...that might motivate a lot more Dems to take to the streets, and more vehement legal actions.

Who knows if the 9 point lead in Florida for Kerry is real. But if it isn't, then it's just as bogus as the Gallup polls swinging toward Bush.  Admit it, every time you see a Gallup poll heavily toward Bush you get a little queasy because you know it will get media attention and there's just a chance it might be right.  Well, why not put the Republicans on the defensive. I'm sick of the Democrats playing poll-debunking and the Republicans not having to.  They did it once with a skewed LA Times poll earlier this year but haven't had to do it much since.  I'd love to make them sweat over a 9-point deficit for Bush in Florida only days before the election.

Here

I wrote CBS a note about the poll yesterday morning... no response, and no mention yet. WTF?

I agree with other posters... if the majority believes the race is close or leaning to Bush, then it will make it easier for the thugs to steal it.