My opinions on an extensive list of issues including the war in Iraq, taxes in Maine, abortion, immigration and oil energy policy are now part of a massive data base being collected by a national polling firm widely used by the Republican Party.

I'm not sure how the information will be used, but -- with two exceptions -- I did my best to answer the questions completely and accurately. More on those exceptions later.

TargetPoint Consulting Inc., based in Alexandria, Va., conducted the poll. In a telephone conversation last week, Michael Meyers, president of TargetPoint, declined to tell me who paid for the poll or who will get the results. I wasn't surprised; that information is usually kept confidential.

Meyers said the goal of this sort of poll is to figure out what messages move voters. In particular, he said, the poll seeks to identify "available voters" -- those who are not firmly committed to one candidate or another -- and what issues could sway them.

An article in the Washington Post described the firm's success in the 2004 presidential election:

Surveys were used "to determine 'anger points' (late-term abortion, trial lawyer fees, estate taxes) that coincided with the Bush agenda for as many as 32 categories of voters, each identifiable by income, magazine subscriptions, favorite television shows and other 'flags.' Merging this data, in turn, enabled those running direct mail, precinct walking and phone bank programs to target each voter with a tailored message."

The questions I was asked seemed designed to find that sort of information.

The man who called me said he was in Orem, Utah. He asked me how often I have voted in past elections, how likely it is that I will vote in November and whom I expected to support. He wanted to know if I considered myself mostly Republican, mostly Democrat or independent.

Many of the questions showed a Republican bias. For example, I was asked how I felt about Democratic Party plans to appoint liberal judges to the Supreme Court; there was no question about conservative judges appointed by President Bush.

The questioner asked me to rate on a scale of zero to 100 how worried, angry or concerned I am about "extreme environmental groups" who seek to block oil exploration in the United States "driving up the cost of home heating oil and gasoline." I'm not sure what extreme groups he had in mind.

The questioner asked about Congress wasting billions on pork barrel projects but not about waste and mismanagement by the president.

Some questions were designed to create a profile of my political views. I was asked which issues were most important to me, social concerns like abortion, national economic issues like taxes, national security issues or pocketbook issues. My answer: economic and national security issues.

I was asked if I supported repeal of the Bush tax cuts, which, the questioner said, would lead to higher taxes. He didn't mention that some Democratic proposals would end tax benefits for the wealthiest people and reduce them for those who are less affluent.

The questioner wanted to know, on a scale of one to 10, how confident I am that either John McCain or Barack Obama will bring change to government if elected. (McCain, 3; Obama, 8) and how confident I am that each has the experience required to be president. I didn't make a note of how I responded to this, but I think both men are well prepared to serve.

The questioner asked if I think each candidate could set aside his own interests to work for the good of the country, how honest I think each is, how risky would it be to elect each of them and how well each would work with the other party. Good questions; I think both Obama and McCain are honest, would work for the national interest, pose no serious risk and could work across the aisle. For the first time in many elections, I think the parties have selected two very qualified candidates.

There were a few questions about Maine. One asked how I voted in the last state election; another wanted to know how concerned I am about state taxes.

As I noted above, there were two questions where I gave less than full answers. One involved the race for U.S. Senate between Republican incumbent Susan Collins and her Democratic challenger, Rep. Tom Allen. I know, like and respect them both. More importantly, I may be moderator of a debate between these two this fall, so I declined to answer that question.

I hedged on one other question. To open the interview, the questioner asked if I was a reporter or otherwise involved in the campaign. I told him I was not involved in the campaign. I didn't respond to the question about being a reporter.

If I had, the interview would have ended and this column would not have been written.

David B. Offer is the retired executive editor of the Kennebec Journal and the Morning Sentinel. E-mail davidboffer@hotmail.com.