Resurgent Republic, the Republican polling/analysis firm that aims to be a GOP counterpart to Democracy Corps, is firing back at the accusations leveled against them by the Dem firm's Stan Greenberg, who has essentially accused them of running a stacked survey.

Greenberg said that Resurgent Republic's first poll defeated its own mission, borrowed from Democracy Corps, of being a partisan pollster that at the same time is explicitly not geared to favor its own side, but to critically examine public opinion and give the party constructive advice:

Nothing is more self-defeating than attributing to the Democratic argument the language and themes Republicans use to attack Democrats rather than the language Democrats use themselves. In effect, your survey has you winning an argument with yourself. Indeed, that is where you start your analysis of the first poll - telling readers in bold and underlined type that you are winning the big ideological debate by two-to-one, which "verifies America remains a center-right country."

In an interview with TPM, Resurgent Republic co-founder Whit Ayres sought to debunk the accusations.

First of all, Ayres said, Greenberg is wrong when he says the poll shows only a two-point gap in partisan identification. This appears to come from including independents who lean Democratic or independent. But Ayres said the poll's cross-tabs actually put these people in the independent column. "That is not a reasonable way to interpret it, based on the way we asked the question," said Ayres.

The actual gap, excluding those independent leaners, is 33% Democrats to 29% Republicans -- pretty close to a recent Gallup poll showing 35% Democrats to 28% Republicans. And he said the poll's methodology is the standard random-dial technique, with a cell-phone sample added in to make sure younger voters are represented.

Ayres also disputed the accusation that respondents were given questions comparing Democratic and Republican positions, but that the Dem positions were phrased in a weak, caricatured way. Greenberg pointed specifically to one that summed up the Democratic economic position as: "Government policies should promote fairness by narrowing the gap between rich and poor, spreading the wealth, and making sure that economic outcomes are more equal."

But Ayres said all the questions were indeed done in good faith.

"The 'spreading the wealth' was a phrase right from Barack Obama. Now they might argue that it was an off-hand comment that wasn't really what he meant, and that's why we didn't just use that," said Ayres. "But clearly, the position of the left is that it's really important to narrow the gap between rich and poor, and make sure economic outcomes are more equal. I don't consider that a bastardization of the liberal argument at all."

He later added: "I've got a bunch of liberal friends who basically say, yup, that's what we should do."

"I think a fair minded person might say we would quibble with this one or that one," said Ayres. "But on balance, they've done a pretty good job representing the Democratic point of view. That was our intent, anyway."

Ayres had one other thing to say about Greenberg's open letter: "Interesting that he sent it to the press before he -- I still haven't received a copy of it."