The story itself is fine, but the survey it refers to is faulty. It's method was fine, but the percentages are misleading. See http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/did-polling-predict-ahmadinejad-victory.html

A shot of skepticism for anyone honestly following the election controversy in Iran. Reasonable, factual, but I think the authors are too confident in their results. The poll was conducted too early and leaves too many unaccounted for to be completely credible.

Fascinating poll results that suggest the outcome of the Iranian is not fraudulent, as many in the west are suggesting.

Interesting analysis from independent U.S. researchers, whose findings suggest that Ahmadinejad was leading opinion polls by a more than 2 to 1 margin a month ago. The authors base their comments on factual results of their preelection surveys, which shed new light on Iranian attitudes towards their country and its leaders. Food for thought.

Not too bad, but a bit of an opinion piece (NB Mr. Ballen's credentials as president of Terror Free Tomorrow: The Center for Public Opinion).

The polling data provide a credible basis for disbelief of fraud charges, which seem to be wishfully accepted by mainstream media. While not conclusive, it is good information for including in the mix of facts and opinions about events in Iran.

Ballen and Doherty make some important points. But poll analyst extraordinaire Nate Silver has noted some flaws in their commentary, and I have added Silver's views to the Links.

This report assumes that the polling organization is competent and politically neutral. Apparently it is. So maybe what the West needs is some indication that wishful thinking doesn't influence the Iranian electorate. After all, several Western countries have, over time, voted in governments which were popular nationally, but not in the rest of the world.