Take the following numbers:

___19______0_____16___________35

___36_____90_____66__________192

___77_____87_____24__________188

____9______1______0___________10

__547____359____196_________1102

__688____537____302_________1527

Divide by *1527*, not 914, and — VIOLA! — you get the reported percentages!

__1.24___0.00___1.05_______2.29

__2.36___5.89___4.32______12.57

__5.04___5.70___1.57______12.31

__0.59___0.07___0.00_______0.65

_35.82__23.51__12.84______72.17

_45.06__35.17__19.78_____100.00

But, as I said, none of these things are conclusive statements on that present. I do think he’s earned a healthy dose of suspicion and more stringent evaluation.

Having read the Democratic Underground threads, however, I think your characterization of their coverage as “a DUI arrest from decades ago” is highly inadequate.

There is a lot more material than just that. Mr. Kaplan has been involved in multiple situations that raise serious doubts about his ethical capacity and standing and Mr. Kaplan continues to associate with the individuals he worked with while committing these not only unethical, but also illegal violations.

Mr. Kaplan’s violations are not just a matter of opinion — he has been pursued by a number of State agencies and Attorneys General, he has been issued multiple citations, he has faced legal judgments in cases where the State is on the other side of the “v.”

I believe the record is far too voluminous to not cast suspicion and legitimate doubt on any endeavor Mr. Kaplan is involved in. In the world of law, all these things would vault the bar of “speaks to his credibility or character” — and most of these things would qualify as related to the present “case” of his activities as a pollster.

With that said, I am all for a redemption narrative, and I believe Mr. Kaplan certainly deserves to have his results evaluated fairly and without bias.

But casting an extra ounce of suspicion on his company, in light of his status as a past “bad actor”? I think that both fair and entirely appropriate.