PA-PPP: "Obama has nothing to worry about there"

[J. J.]

Decent track record?

Honestly, they excelled everywhere except Pennsylvania in the primaries, for what it's worth. They claim to have made a methodological error in the Pennsylvania primary which was fixed for later primaries (and indeed they were the best pollster for all remaining primaries), although they haven't said what that error was.

I do worry a pollster who says that a candidate has nothing to worry about, without looking at results.

[J. J.]

They don't look at results?

From the first post:

"We've done enough interviews in Pennsylvania the last couple days to be pretty confident in saying Obama has nothing to worry about there.

And I know some will say, 'yeah but you screwed up the primary there.' But the mistake we made was not anything specific to Pennsylvania, we fixed it by the next set of primaries and we were number one on the Survey USA report cards for every primary we polled after it- Indiana, North Carolina, and Oregon."

[J. J.]

I don't get what you mean.  They're looking at their own results from their thousands of interviews in Pennsylvania recently.

They haven;t weighted them yet, or at least hadn't at the time that statement was made. But it's really quite stupid of J. J. to think that a pollster wouldn't know what to make of unweighted numbers before applying their own weights to them.

Or, they are referring to previous samples.  It should be PPP (D).