In reading through the actual results of the PIPA survey, it becomes clear that PIPA didn't just use creative footnoting on the issues of Kerry's positions on Kyoto and the International Criminal Court in order to claim that his supporters accurately understand his positions. Rather, they also hid inconvenient results--or one major inconvenient result, anyway.
As shown on page 16 of the questionnaire, the respondents were asked to rate Bush's and Kerry's positions on the question: "In the Middle East conflict, should the United States take Israel’s side, take the Palestinians’ side, or not take either side?" And in answer to this question, only 20% of Kerry supporters realized that Kerry's position is to take Israel's side, while an amazing 68% believe that his position is not to take either side.
Kerry's position on Israel is crystal clear; nobody reading his policy paper on Israel could possibly mistake where his sympathies lie. He has even gone to pains to reassure the Israeli lobby in the US that his support for Israel is second to none.
So Kerry's supporters are just as far off the mark on this issue as they were regarding Kerry's positions on Kyoto and the ICC. Yet this inconvenient result was simply omitted from the final PIPA report--thus removing yet another obstacle to PIPA's desired conclusion that Kerry supporters are "accurate in assessing their candidate's positions on all these issues."
I contacted PIPA yesterday, requesting that they either retract or correct these portions of their report, but as yet they've not responded. We'll see what matters more to them: accuracy and honesty, or putting out results that are favorable to Kerry and his supporters.