I diaried it on DK this morning (link below), and did not get, shall we say, a warm response.  The overwhelming opinion was that the poll was a meaningless outlier because it was taken right after McCain's bounce, plus it was close to 9/11.  I have no idea how this accounts for the June-to-August decline in the numbers, but the Kossacks find it a compelling argument, it seems.

The poll results basically show Obama with a humongous lead in NYC, and McCain with a moderate lead in the NYC suburbs and the rest of the state.

I have no idea how reliable Siena is as a polling organization; I think the only two meaningful ways to interpret these results are [1] Siena's whole set of polls is a mess and should be ignored in total, or [2] the polls are generally good, even if the most recent one is skewed by the timing, and indicate a genuine erosion of Obama's support in NY.  (I was under the impression that Obama had an enormous lead in NY, so these Siena numbers were quite a surprise to me.)

Can anyone here shed some light on how reliable Siena is?

I would take that poll out of contention.

The Senate, after all, is the Supreme Court's last line of defense against rabid ideologues cloaked in the mantle of "strict constructionism."

Her star is fading, (I said that), her interview with Gibson was so-so, and they KNOW it which is why they are still not allowing her to take questions.  Which of course is only going to give the media bloodthirst, which of course I predicted.

I also predicted that the economy would tank when the stimulus ran out.  And that the polling numbers would would roll with them.  

Obama has barely changed his message, Biden is still lobbing shots at Palin and McCain and the left wing blogs are still chasing Palin stories non-stop.

Hmmmm.. Seems to me that the economy, a fading star and the big Palinpalooza is not sustainable.  It would seem to me that lying and lying some more is not working all that well either, which of course makes the media (hell even the WSJ called her out) more bloodthirsty does not play well either.

it's a shame what this site has become.  But, you obviously chose it.

But really, your blinded pushing of Obama through polls is just too much.  Oh yes, now quoting biased blog sites who just started their own polls as a reputable tracking. lol

and

" Ras ticks towards Obama, McCain's lead sliced to 1,"   ???? WHAT???? LOL  Oh yes, you must have worked for the stock market in another life... It's tumbling, crashing....1 pt down on mcCain and that's "Sliced and ticking towards Obama".

Do you really think you're deluding people this way?

sad, so sad.  Say anything to promote a cadidate, even if it means a divorce from reality.

McCain is viewed favorably by 60%, up three points from a week ago. Obama's ratings are at 52% favorable, down three points.

I would otherwise tend to discount this poll which shows the race in PA tied 47-47, but this factoid jumped out at me.

My guess is that if the demographic model of this poll is reasonable, then it probably differs little from, say, Gallup's demographic model -- and Gallup's tracking poll shows a consistent 2 pt edge for McCain -- over 6 pts deviation from this poll.

And the problem is that a 6 pt deviation, or thereabouts, over many days can't be explained away as random fluctuations. There must be some other methodological difference underlying the discrepancy.

Obama has held steady for the last three days, while McCain has dropped two points in two days.

Second, the Bradley Effect is still very much with us.

As a result, charged Susan Greenhalgh, a spokeswoman for watchdog group Voter Action, the systems on which Americans will decide the race between Barack Obama and John McCain in November are "scandalously flawed"' and "the integrity of this election is in question."