Sometimes it's difficult to believe that The Zogby poll is so highly regarded on this blog. There are those that believe Zogby is objective, and accurate, and may even have a democratic leaning. Nothing can be further from the truth, and it isn't difficult to back this claim up.
Take a look at the New York 2000 Senate race. One day before the election, Mr. Zogby had Rick Lazio defeating Hillary Clinton by a point, 50-49. In the final 11 polls he showed Lazio leading 5 times. It was only on the final day that Zogby gave Clinton a 3 point lead, as most other polls showed her pulling away easily.
You might ask, who was Zogby polling for in that election? Well, surprise, surprise, Zogby was working for the New York Post, and Fox News. Yeah, thanks for the objectively fair and balanced polling, and Thank God for coincidence.
There is more in 2000. Zogby's final presidential poll in California had the race tied between Al Gore, and George Bush at 45-45. Now let's face it, Bush would have won the election in a breeze if that result was at all near correct. It is not hard to visualize the domino effect of states falling out of the Gore column if we had a deadheat in California.
Zogby revels in his national poll results, and conveniantly forgets California, but one has to wonder how any good pollster could have gotten such a big state as California so wrong. This was a huge mistake on the level of Rasmussen's calling the national results for Bush by 8 points on election day.
So tomorrow, and the next day when you read the Zogby tracking polls bear all this in mind. Zogby is not always anymore objective than any other polling outfit with an agenda, and Zogby is not always very accurate at all.