Gallup explains it has what it considers a time-tested formula for determining most likely voters. It asks eight questions, such as current intensity of interest, past voting behavior and interest, and whether you know where your voting place is.

"We've discovered that if we ask a set of more indirect questions, we can better predict who is or is not likely to vote," Frank Newport, editor in chief of the Gallup Poll, has said.

But there is reason to suspect those criteria are outdated, especially in an election where both sides say the intensity level is much higher than four years ago and get-out-the-vote organizations are considerably better than ever -- few people on Nov. 2 will be in the dark on where the voting polls are.

"A formula that made sense years ago may not recognize all the changes in society," notes Mr. Hart. "It gives more credence to past behavior and too little to current interest."

"For low-turnout elections those old models work well," suggests Bill McInturff, a Republican, and the other WSJ/NBC News pollster. "But in today's presidential election those models tend to [tilt to] a little older, a little more white, a little more affluent and a little more Republican voters. They may miss some of the extraordinary activity going on in African-American and Latino communities."

The registered-likely voters dichotomy also is evident in some of Gallup's state surveys including last week's Ohio results." Among registered voters in the Buckeye State, Bush-Cheney had a 48%-to- 47% edge, a dead heat. Among likely voters, however, this poll had the Republicans up 52%-44%; that garnered all the attention, followed by a spate of stories suggesting this key battleground state was moving to the president.

Curiously, the Gallup poll in the similar state of Pennsylvania at the same time showed a virtually even race among both registered and likely voters. And occasionally, the screen favors the Democrats; a Marist survey this week of New York state showed Sen. Kerry 11 points ahead among likely voters, but only seven points ahead among registered voters.

But most of the time the screen for likely voters tilts Republican. In 2000, Gallup's election eve survey showed George Bush ahead by two points among its likely voters; he trailed Al Gore by a point among registered voters, very close to the final outcome.

In 2000, the next to last WSJ/NBC poll before the election showed Republicans doing three points better among likely voters than registered voters. The election eve survey showed Bush up three points among likely voters, but failed to tally registered voters and didn't predict Al Gore's victory in the popular vote.

The Wall Street Journal and NBC News have settled on one question to screen likely turnout. Registered voters are asked their interest level in the election on a scale of 1-10, and those that respond 9 or 10 are considered likely voters.

Both camps expect an increase in the 105 million Americans who voted last time; the Bush camp looks for about 111-112 million while the Kerry campaign projects 116-118 million; nobody can be sure exactly who those additional voters might be.

The probable outlook: Polls will vary and conflict if this race remains tight. Also, poll watchers must remember that the best survey has a three or four-point margin of error; that means if it shows the race even, one or the other candidate actually could be up by a half-dozen. Here's a final guide: If almost all the election eve polls show one candidate up four or five points or more, take it to the bank. But if most show the race within a couple of points, plan on staying up late election night.

* * *

WISE MEN: John Kerry remained on the defensive this week, and was unable to make up much needed ground against President Bush, according to two men who have run presidential campaigns in the past.

"The Bush bounce is beginning to look like a Hurricane Ivan surge," cracked Hamilton Jordan, who directed Jimmy Carter's presidential campaigns. With the contest still looking "more like a referendum on Kerry," he adds that the "relatively small number of undecideds" are moving "disproportionately in Bush's direction."

What advice would he give to the Democratic candidate? "He needs to find a strong and simple message and make it his own … focused on the deteriorating situation in Iraq and on the U.S. economy. … John Kerry needs to look deep inside himself, decide what he believes and thinks, cast caution to the wind and start saying it with some passion and emotion."

But John Sears, who ran Ronald Reagan's 1976 campaign, believes the Democratic nominee has "very limited" room on Iraq: "You get up and start criticizing the war and that may help Bush. … Iraq ultimately may hurt [the president], but if it becomes a political issue people usually rally behind the president." Thus, he believes Sen. Kerry has "no choice" but to focus on the economy and domestic issues.

The president's campaign, however, better be careful, Mr. Sears cautions, "This week he didn't do much more than stall the clock. He's got to keep giving people reasons to vote for him. Now may not be quite the time, but soon he has to be pro-active."

Mr. Jordan believes that the president, while "hitting on all cylinders" now, is "still vulnerable on the true issues facing the country in this election. Bush only looks good right now in contrast to Kerry."

Short Takes

Déjà Vu: The Florida Supreme Court on Friday will consider Ralph Nader's appeal of a lower-court ruling keeping him off the November ballot; Gov. Jeb Bush's secretary of state had sought to have his name added. If the Florida high court rules against Mr. Nader, he could appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. George Bush won Florida -- and the election -- in 2000 by 537 votes (Nader got 97,488 votes), when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the Florida Supreme Court and stopped a recount.

Write to Albert R. Hunt at al.hunt@wsj.com¹.