I think not. I would be "cherry picking" if there were a dozen such polls and I had picked only the most favorable ones. In fact, to the best of my knowledge, EVERY formal poll taken in Iraq has given similar results, showing that overall the population thinks that they are better off now, that the future will be better, and that they don't want the coalition to leave the job half done. To be fair, each poll shows some things where the Iraqis are unhappy as well.

You might want to check what sources you are using for the overwhelming negative views of Iraqis that you seem to think are the correct ones.

My main point is that Polls in general are just a distraction of the central argument. Polls are also not proof either of our rightness or wrongness in this war, nor is it proof of the threat caused by Iraq, nor is it an adequate response to questions of accountability raised by the aftermath of the war, and the now undeniable facts.

Your original post mentioned the polls as though it were something I had pulled up from DEBKAfile. I was simply reiterating my sources on the polls, which would be considered credible by most people.

But to fillet the herring: the Zogby is to 600 in just four cities. the Gallup is just in Iraq to under 1500 people... so yeah, my criticisms of these polls as a touchstone for 'truth' are largely accurate... Even as polls go, they are pretty inconclusive

This is inconsistent of you. How many people does it take to make a valid poll? The Washington Post poll that showed that people believed a Saddam-9/11 connection to be at least "somewhat likely" polled only about 1,000 people, and those results are being trumpeted from the mountaintops by the Left.

Earlier, when you had posted links, you must have posted the wrong links, cause I sure as hell could not find any methodology.

Links like the Gallup one change as time goes on, and it is possible that the methodology was not posted there when I linked originally, although I thought it was. I got hung by something like this recently when someone posted an Ed Asner quote (from a first person interview!!) that I posted. The interviewer later found out Ed had said something completely different (not much of an interviewer, is he?), and posted a later retraction on the same page I linked. Made me look like a dork when people linked to the page later from my post.

It's kind of beside the point. One assumes that Gallup and Zogby know how to take a poll.

And if my documentation was making an impression, I wouldn't have to keep reposting it. Besides, it isn't just for your benefit.