OH, THOSE ULTRA-HIGH STANDARDS – HOW WILL WE EVER MEET THEM?  –  AT 8:03 A.M. ET:  The New York Times ran a story on the tightening Senate race in Massachusetts between Democrat Martha Coakley and Republican Scott Brown, which will end in a special election on January 19th.  In the middle of the story is this:

The poll that suggested Ms. Coakley’s lead was narrowing, which was conducted by Rasmussen Reports and does not meet the polling standards of The New York Times because it relied on automated telephone calls, suggested Mr. Brown had strikingly strong support among independent voters. But most of them are unlikely to come out for a special election at an odd time of year, Ms. Marsh said.

COMMENT:  "Does not meet the polling standards of The New York Times.."?  What standards would those be?  It might be just lovely if The Times would take a look at Rasmussen's track record, which is one of the best in the industry.  That determines the value of a polling organization. 

Now, as for the comment by a certain Ms. Marsh, presumably some kind of expert, that independents are unlikely to vote in a special election at "an odd time of year," one becomes baffled.  Rasmussen specifically polls among likely voters, which is why his polls are so accurate.  And voters have been known to show interest, even in January, although it is such an odd month.

Nose out of the air, Times.  Your story doesn't make sense.

January 8,  2010