Charles Blow, "Voter Suppression and Political Polls": Poll Respondents "Think That They Will Able [sic] to Vote for President Obama"

In his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Voter Suppression and Political Polls" (http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/01/voter-suppression-and-political-polls/), Charles Blow is encouraged by the results of a New York Times/CBS News/Quinnipiac poll which indicates that voters favor Obama in swing states:

"'Likely voters' were polled in the swing states of Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, and President Obama led Mitt Romney in each state — by 6 points in Ohio and Florida and by 11 points in Pennsylvania. President Obama carried all three states in the last election and needs them in this one. Encouraging for him, right?"

However, Blow then vents his displeasure with new photo ID requirements in Pennsylvania and cuts in early voting periods in Ohio and Florida, which could skew the results of this and other polls:

"This year, we may have to take the polls with an even larger grain of salt than usual. The greatest margin of uncertainty may well be caused by poll respondents who think that they will able [sic] to vote for President Obama in November, but may not be allowed to do so.

And it’s all thanks to the Great Suppression of 2012."

However, as I observed in an earlier blog entry (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2012/08/washington-post-swing-state-poll-romney.html), Blow remarkably does not take into account that the new New York Times/CBS News/Quinnipiac poll surveyed more Democrats than Republicans. As reported by The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/swing-state-poll-romney-still-struggling-to-convince-voters-he-cares/2012/08/01/gJQAjKoAPX_story.html?hpid=z2):

"A new poll by CBS News, the New York Times, and Quinnipiac University found that 54 percent of likely voters in Pennsylvania, 55 percent in Ohio, and 49 percent in Florida said Romney did not care about their problems.

. . . .

President Obama fared better: In all three states, at least 55 percent said the president did understand their needs and problems."

However, the WAPO article then tells us:

"The polls must be taken with this caveat: In all three states, significantly more Democrats than Republicans were surveyed, which could affect the results."

Oh, really? If a poll surveys significantly more Democrats than Republicans, this could affect the results? Who would have ever guessed?

More to the point, who would have ever imagined that a poll conducted in part by The New York Times would survey more Democrats than Republicans? Will wonders never cease!