I got copied on this e-mail that Joe Sansone sent to RealClear politics:

I checked the numbers and it looks like Joe is right. The Romney number in the field containing non-candidates is 21, not 25. That 25 number comes from the same poll that has Ron Paul at 11.

Yet RealClear quotes the high number for Romney and the low number for Paul.

I imagine this was simply a mistake, but such mistakes make it difficult to assess the field. Even if you assume Paul won't win, as long as he's in double digits he will have a major role in the race.

Those double digits have to come out of someone's else's totals. Whose? Such questions decide elections. And RealClear is not real clear on this one.

UPDATE: RealClear responds, and Joe concedes the point:

Joe,

We use "registered voter" #s as opposed to "general population" numbers when they are avaliable. We entered the RV #s (w/o Christie and Palin) this morning when the poll was released. They are correct.

Thanks,

John

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postabcpoll_100211.html

21/23/24. (IF WOULD VOTE FOR CHRISTIE OR PALIN) If neither (Christie) nor (Palin) run, for whom would you vote? Which candidate would you lean toward?

NET LEANED VOTE PREFERENCE

--------------- Without Christie/Palin -----------------

Among gen pop Among RVs

10/2/11 9/1/11 7/17/11 10/2/11 9/1/11 7/17/11

Mitt Romney 25 25 30 25 25 30

Herman Cain 16 4 7 17 5 7

Rick Perry 16 29 8 17 30 8

Ron Paul 11 10 11 9 10 10

Newt Gingrich 7 6 6 9 5 6

Michele Bachmann 7 8 16 7 9 17

Rick Santorum 2 3 3 2 3 3

Jon Huntsman 1 1 3 1 1 3

Tim Pawlenty NA NA 3 NA NA 3

Other (vol.) 2 2 1 2 2 1

No one/None of them (vol.) 5 5 2 4 4 2

Would not vote (vol.) 1 2 1 1 1 *

No opinion 7 5 8 7 5 9