If this McCain spin is even close to being right and the L.A. Times/Bloomberg poll had something like 22% Republican party ID, there is something seriously wrong with it and it almost certainly underrepresents McCain’s strength.  Republican party ID has declined, but there is no reason to think it has dropped by 14 points since 2006.  That would help to account for McCain’s fairly anemic showing in that poll.  The Newsweek poll also uses a pool of respondents with just 22% Republican party ID (23% among RVs).  So the model of both the LAT and Newsweek polls is questionable, and both seem to be underrepresenting Republicans–hence the large leads for Obama.  I have seen several people suggest that the LAT poll might mean that the Newsweek result was more reliable, but both are based on what seems to be a seriously flawed model of the electorate.  Polling registered voters is potentially misleading enough as it is, but these results require you to believe that fewer than one in four voters in America identifies as a Republican.  While not unimaginable (GOP party ID sank to these levels after Watergate), it is pretty unlikely.

P.S. The surveys that rely on a pool of adults or RVs tend to have the lowest Republican party ID, while polls of LVs tend to have considerably higher ones.  The party ID flaw in these polls derives from polling registered voters rather than likely ones.  I should add, however, that the Gallup daily tracking poll is also a survey of registered voters, and shows the election tied at 45.