« Action Time | Main | Making a Difference in the Field »
Friday, September 17, 2004
General Election Cattle Call, September 17
Posted by Chris Bowers(Yesterday���s Results in Parenthesis)
National Popular Vote Projection
Kerry: 49.19 (48.83)
Bush: 48.81 (49.17)
Status: Toss-up
Polls included: ABC, CBS, Fox, Gallup, IBD / CSM, Newsweek, Pew (re-weighted); Economist, Harris, ICR, Rasmussen and Zogby (un-weighted)
Recent Polls not included: AP, Time
Electoral Vote Projection
Bush: 284, 196 solid (284, 196)
Kerry: 254, 197 solid (254, 190; MI becomes solid, MN becomes lean)
States Changing Party Hands from 2000: NH to Kerry; WI to Bush
States Projected Under Three Points: FL, MO, OH and WI for Bush (68, with FL, OH and WI moving under 3); IA, ME CD-2, NH, OR and PA for Kerry (40, with ME statewide moving over 3)
That���s right���on a day when a poll is released showing Bush up 13, Kerry gained in my projections. This is largely because the new Pew poll was added, and I was quickly able to track down the Gallup Party ID internals, which actually show the race tied at 48. These new polls also increased the size of the undecided poll, which always allows Kerry to inch up in my projections. Without the undecideds allocated, Bush leads 47.08 to 45.84.
The important trend in recent polls, with the exception of Gallup, is that they no longer show Bush rising. Instead, the race is static or Kerry is gaining. Whenever the trend is moving in Bush���s direction, I feel nervous even if Kerry is ahead or the race is still tied. After all, who knows for sure when the trend will change? However, now that the trend no longer favors Bush, I feel a lot more relaxed, even though the campaign is still essentially a toss-up. In fact, the campaign is such a toss-up, that if the election were held tomorrow, I would feel confident about projecting 216 electoral votes for Bush, 214 for Kerry, and 108 too close to call. To win, Kerry would need to piece together 56 electoral votes from FL, IA, ME CD-2, NH, OH, OR, PA and WI. That is impossible without winning one of the big three (FL, OH and PA).
Posted at 06:59 PM in General Election Cattle Call | Technorati
Comments
Those gallup polls do not make ANY sense. I mean do they really think Bush could win by 13%?
Posted by: David Trinh at September 17, 2004 07:01 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Gallup is so bad. Especially when I see how they over-represent the GOP. Their sample, from what I read, is 40% Republicans, 33% Democrats, even though in the last three elections significantly more Democrats have turned out than Republicans.
Posted by: Nathaniel at September 17, 2004 07:24 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
CBS/NYT just released their poll showing Bush up 50 - 41 among registred voters. This reinforces the Gallup poll.
Posted by: David at September 17, 2004 07:35 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
CBS/NYT is showing Bush up 53 - 39 in the 18 battleground states.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/17/opinion/polls/main644205.shtml
More bad news, The Florida Supreme Court okayed for Nader to be on the Florida ballot.
Posted by: David at September 17, 2004 07:41 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Here's something to chew on. Gallip is polling more Republicans than Democrats by their own admission.
This morning we awoke to the startling news that despite a flurry of different polls this week all showing a tied race, the venerable Gallup Poll, as reported widely in the media (USA Today and CNN) today, showed George W. Bush with a huge 55%-42% lead over John Kerry amongst likely voters. The same Gallup Poll showed an 8-point lead for Bush amongst registered voters (52%-44%). Before you get discouraged by these results, you should be more upset that Gallup gets major media outlets to tout these polls and present a false, disappointing account of the actual state of the race. Why?
Because the Gallup Poll, despite its reputation, assumes that this November 40% of those turning out to vote will be Republicans, and only 33% will be Democrat. You read that correctly. I asked Gallup, who have been very courteous to my requests, to send me this morning their sample breakdowns by party identification for both their likely and registered voter samples they use in these national and I suspect their state polls. This is what I got back this morning:
http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/002806.html
Posted by: Rock_nj at September 17, 2004 07:45 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I wonder what the Party ID internals were of that CBS poll. What do you want to bet they oversampled Republicans?
Posted by: Nathaniel at September 17, 2004 07:51 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
John Kerry has been in a slow downward spiral that gets more serious with each passing week. Even Joe Biden acknowledges that Kerry so far has not inspired the American people nor has he clearly driven home his message to the voters. I still don't see Kerry doing anything to correct all of this. Let's face it, many of us would be much happier and feel a whole lot more comfortable right now if Kerry was where Bush is in so many of the polls. I don't recall folks ignoring or calling into serious questioning Gallup--not until they started showing what for us Democrats is our worst nightmare. Sure one can cherry pick, choosing to only believe the polls that show everything rosy for Kerry, but I'm afraid those folks are going to be in for a rude awakening. I would question Gallup if they were an aberration, but there are other polls cited in this thread (and others not cited here) that support the fact that Bush is gaining momentum while Kerry continues to falter.
The good news is the election is not being held today. That said, Kerry desparately needs to define himself and his vision for the country. He seems to have lost his way since the Democratic Convention, and he doesn't have a whole lot of time to find it.
Posted by: Pepe at September 17, 2004 07:55 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Gallup admitted that they sample 40% Republican, 33% Democratic. No wonder they come out with the outcomes they report. Kerry is regaining some of the lost momo. The race is essentially tied.
Posted by: Rock_nj at September 17, 2004 08:05 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Pepe, I understand you are trying not to get too hopeful, but Gallup itself happily admits that it oversamples Republicans. Remember, this is the same pollster that projected Bush winning by 13 points right before the 2000 election...the same pollster inspired the famous article in 1948, "Dewey beats Truman".
BTW, is there an easy way to find out the Party ID internals in major pollsters? I'm particularly interested in ARG, Rasmussen, and Zogby. I'll try to find out the sample on the CBS poll too.
Even aside from the Party ID internals, think common sense: when every poll shows the race a dead heat and one shows it a landslide, who do you believe?
Posted by: Nathaniel at September 17, 2004 08:10 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Sure, Nathaniel and Rock_nj, the race is tied.
yeah, sure.
Posted by: david at September 17, 2004 08:23 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
when every poll shows the race a dead heat and one shows it a landslide, who do you believe?
I agree, and the Gallup Poll is not the only major poll out there showing that the race is not a dead heat right now. I just think enough polls are showing a widening Bush lead to make it definitely a possibility. And for all the polls that might be undercounting Democrats, might not the same thing be happening in polls showing a tight race--maybe they are undercounting Republicans. The truth probably lies somewhere in between the two extremes.
Let me ask the question this way: if the election were held today, who do you think would win? If you had to put a year's salary on the line, would your answer remain the same? I would put my money on Bush. As I said, the positive news is that the election isn't being held today. However, with each day that goes by, Kerry has one less day to turn the corner and assert himself. I hope his strategy is not riding entirely on outperforming Bush in the debates, because by then, it will be too late, and at best, the debates will probably wind up being a draw.
Posted by: Pepe at September 17, 2004 08:33 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
If the election were held today, Bush would probably win, by taking Flordia and Wisconsin. But, there's plenty of time for Kerry to make things up. To heartening stats for Dems is:
The fact that in the 2000 contest, Democrats were underpolled by 3%, which is why shortly before the election just about all the pundits expected an fairly easy win for Bush. If it's the same case this year, and I bet it is, Kerry will pick up some momo into election day and post bigger numbers than the polling suggests.
Also, undecideds tend to vote for the challenger by as much as 80%. That has been the case since at least 1976. Perhaps Kerry doesn't have the charisma, and perhaps Bush has people scared enough, that it won't happen that way this year, but even if Kerry gets 60% of undecideds, that's millions more voters in his column than are counted in today's polls.
Pepe, I wish things were rosier. But the Repubican attack machine is a well oil propaganda operation. They know the buttons to push, and the RNC and 9/11 ceremonies have given Bush the upper hand for now. It is interesting how both the RNC and 9/11 have had much less of an effect in the west, almost none actually. Kerry will bounce back. He's a strong closer and good debater. Don't give up yet.
Posted by: Rock_nj at September 17, 2004 09:02 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Polls, polls, and more polls:
Gallup 9/15 55 42
Democracy Corps 9/14 49 48
ICR 9/12 52 44
IBD/CSM/TIPP 9/12 47 47
Zogby 9/9 47 45
Time 9/9 54 42
American Research Group 9/1 48 47
Pew 9/14 47 46
Harris Poll 9/13 47 48 (Kerry actually leads one)
Rasmussen 9/16 49 45
Posted by: DFuller at September 17, 2004 09:04 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Through out the outliners and Bush has a 3% lead, just enough for Kerry to make up on election day from the Dems who are underpolled. The race is essentially a dead heat, with Bush in a slight advantage right now. The debates will be the big factor this year.
Posted by: Rock_nj at September 17, 2004 09:09 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Good points Pepe.
Posted by: David at September 17, 2004 09:15 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Yes, David, it is a tie. Bush may have a lead within the margin of error, but all you have to do is look at Gallup's sample to see how these results can be skewed.
Posted by: Nathaniel at September 17, 2004 09:15 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I don't know about Time, CBS, etc. but as far as Gallup, if you reweight the numbers, it is a tie.
Posted by: Nathaniel at September 17, 2004 09:20 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Pepe needs to calm down and try to be a little more optimistic.
Ronald Reagan was behind by 8% as late as the end of October of 1980, and look who won in a landslide.
George W. Bush was behind by 10% in October of 2000, and look who eventually won the election.
On top of this, polls are often wrong. There's a new poll almost every hour at this point, and if you take them all seriously, you're going to give yourself a nervous breakdown.
Posted by: Mark R at September 18, 2004 02:13 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
But Reagan, like Clinton, was charismatic and a real orator. With hindsight one can see how Reagan managed to connect with as many voters as he did. I don't see Kerry as having the charisma or skills to get his message across like a Reagan or a Clinton. If I felt his message was really getting through, I wouldn't be so nervous. He is not succeeding in inspiring and motiviating people to vote for him, and we all know to win he has to be more than simply the anti-Bush!
Posted by: Pepe at September 18, 2004 08:29 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Forget it, Pepe. You're determined to believe that Kerry will lose. Good attitude.
For the rest of you who understand how the numbers can shift unexpectedly, here's an article from CNN that you might appreciate:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/16/campaign.swing/index.html
Posted by: Mark R at September 18, 2004 02:08 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I agree with Pepe about the downward spiral, which in my opinion began in April when they essential stopped running negative ads against Bush, even though they had money. I sent Kerry $100 myself, in part in response to those clever ads in the NY Times suggesting that most of the money raised would be used to attack Bush. Instead it was used for not very effective puff pieces for Kerry. What a shame. I hope I'm being too pessimistic, but I think it's gone.
Posted by: Ben at September 18, 2004 02:50 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I agree with Pepe about the downward spiral, which in my opinion began in April when they essential stopped running negative ads against Bush, even though they had money. I sent Kerry $100 myself, in part in response to those clever ads in the NY Times suggesting that most of the money raised would be used to attack Bush. Instead it was used for not very effective puff pieces for Kerry. What a shame. I hope I'm being too pessimistic, but I think it's gone.
Posted by: Ben at September 18, 2004 02:50 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Forget it, Pepe. You're determined to believe that Kerry will lose. Good attitude.
Actually, Mark, I am simply trying to view the campaigns with unbiased eyes. Nothing more, nothing less.
Believe me, I really, really don't want another four years of Bush--for a variety of reasons. However, I'm not going to try to fool myself into believing that Kerry is exactly where he wants to be at this moment. I don't want to set myself up for a huge emotional fall in November. Just know that if I'm wrong, no one will be more euphoric than I.
Posted by: Pepe at September 18, 2004 10:14 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I think Pepe is just being honest. Things aren't looking all that great for Kerry right now. He has failed to connect with voters. His last chance might be the debates.
It is kind of strange polling we're seeing though. Bush has suddenly made a race of it in states like PA and NJ. While Kerry is remarkably close in states like MO and CO. Kerry really needs to give people a reason to vote for him this fall.
Posted by: Rock_nj at September 19, 2004 12:02 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Pepe -- I've been following your daily trolling campaign on this site for a while, and while I appreciate the value of trying to keep a clear head amidst all the ups & downs, your pessimism is so consistent and unremitting it makes me wonder whether you even want Kerry to win. I suppose you think you're performing a valuable public service by keeping unfounded optimism in check, but let me assure you we can take care of ourselves on that score.
Look: Bush-Cheney's current strategy is to create a self-fulfilling prophecy that will demoralize Democrats into staying home on November 2. The nature of a self-fulfilling prophecy is that it requires your participation to come true. Instead of seeing this for what it is -- a desperate move by a campaign that has run out of ideas -- you're taking the bait. Next to our squeamish reluctance to fight dirty the way the Bush boys do, this is our party's biggest vulnerability: the impulse to roll over at the first sign of trouble, real or imagined (or, in this case, manufactured). It's as if we're so used to losing that we actually like it.
"Kerry is dull." "Kerry still needs to define himself" -- very original insights. What cable news pundit fest did you crib those from? We've been over all this before. Kerry has plenty of weaknesses as a candidate, and if I can indulge in a little we-told-you-so, you're not the first to point them out. But the primaries are over. Don't you think it's well past the point where dwelling on the limitations of the "ABB" strategy is productive?
Maybe you find it safer, emotionally & psychologically, to keep expectations low. It makes sense -- you don't want to tempt fate, and if Bush wins, at least you still get the consolation of being right. But do us a favor and keep it to yourself. If we blow it this time, it will be because Karl Rove, with your help, succeeded in convincing us that we're fighting for yet another lost cause.
Forgive me if I've misjudged you. Maybe you're not just another kneejerk doom-and-gloom nihilist Democrat -- maybe you're a thinly-disguised Republican op trying to sow doubt & despair around here. It doesn't make much difference from where I stand.
Posted by: Josh at September 19, 2004 01:01 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Josh, you've got to be kidding! Yes, unlike Rock in NJ (someone I very much respect on this forum), you have most definitely misjudged me.
Most of my friends are Democrats, and I'm just echoing their concerns about Kerry and the direction his campaign is taking. These are not only Democratic friends that I have right here in good ol' NC, but in places as diverse as Georgia, Chicago, and NYC. I could also throw in my mother in northeast Ohio, who has always been a strong supporter of the Democratic party. Yet even she has misgivings about Kerry.
Don't worry--we're all voting for Kerry in November, but I do take offense that you conclude that anyone who questions Kerry and the direction of his campaign must be a thinly-disguised Republican. For what it's worth, I am a registered Democrat and I intend to vote for the Democrats across the board in my state. The Democratic party that I belong to allows and even encourages people within its ranks to freely ask questions and speak their minds whenever they like. Do you want a party of mindless followers who agree with whatever the party tells them, like they had back in the former Soviet Union? I think not! I love this party, and it's our only hope for any real changes. That's why I'm so discouraged and disheartened that Kerry and his campaign seem to be missing a golden opportunity to unseat Bush. I'll bet Joseph Biden is kicking himself time and time again for deciding not to run in this election. We need Bush out, and I would vote for anyone to replace him. However, I know that I'm just part of the choir in that sense. There is a substantial part of the population that is not going to vote for just anybody, simply because he is not Bush. That is what I think you choose not to see, Josh, and it's what I and many other Democrats see all too clearly. I'm sorry if you think that makes us members of the GOP.
Posted by: Pepe at September 19, 2004 02:00 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Let me add my 2 cents. I have been watching the mainstream media, and they are doing everything in their power to sway the election for Bush. I see very little coverage, including positive coverage, for Kerry and Edwards.
Kerry and Edwards are excellent candidates, far more talented, able, and charismatic than Bush and Cheney. If you want a beer buddy, vote for Bush. If you want a President, vote for Kerry.
If you want a CEO of a power driven company, vote for Cheney. If you want a people oriented candidate who fights for citizens' rights, vote for Edwards.
Now, it wouldn't surprise me if Republican operatives are posting at various sites on the internet. If the election is as close as has been reported, the Republican party will use every edge to again, sway the election towards Bush. Did you know that far more Republicans use the internet than Democrats?
As for the polls, forget them. They are definitely skewed. Go out and fight for Kerry and Edwards to produce a win in 2004!
Think of the downside - FOUR more long years of Bush and Cheney. This thought will galvanize anybody into action!
Pepe, I disagree with you entirely. Kerry is far more presidential looking, more suave, smooth, and polished. Bush has this jerky, hesitation-stutter speech, fumbling appearance. Cheney looks like he has some health problems, as he's always hanging on to a podium, and can you imagine how silly the debates will look if they are all orchestrated in sit down style? Why do you suppose Bush-Cheney & Co want sit down debates? I'll tell you why, because Kerry towers over Bush and has better hair, and will look more presidential. Cheney obviously is too weak and stiff to stand for a debate, so he, too, prefers sitting down.
Posted by: Shar at September 19, 2004 03:36 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Pepe,
You've criticized Kerry and Edwards as not being particularly charismatic and great orators. Do you actually believe that Bush and Cheny are charismatic and good orators? Give me a break.
Posted by: Shar at September 19, 2004 03:46 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Do you actually believe that Bush and Cheny are charismatic and good orators? Give me a break.
Where in anything that I have ever written in this forum have you read that I consider Bush & Cheney to be good orators? Are you kidding? I have gone on the record as stating that Reagan & Clinton were outstanding orators, because they were, regardless of whether or not you liked them. Both were also charismatic and able to connect with the voters. I don't have much to say about Bush and his campaign, because they are not my concern. I am concerned about Kerry and his campaign, which is what I comment on here. The problem is that since August, it seems that the Bush campaign has kept the Kerry campaign on the constant defensive and off track.
Posted by: Pepe at September 19, 2004 04:51 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Bush & Cheney just promise to continue the image of America that a majority of Americans have grown to love. That image is that of the U.S. out there kicking ass in the world; even if our own country is falling apart.
You can say a lot of negative things about the Republicans, but one thing you have to hand to them is that they've figured out propaganda American-style. They know exactly how to push the American people's buttons. They know how to get people to focus on matters external to this country, so their abysmal domestic record doesn't get scrutinized. That's exactly we're seeing in this election. Bush & Cheney are trying to get people focused on Iraq and "war on terrorism". What plan do they have to address our far more deadly domestic problems? Are you more likely to die from:
a. Terrorism
b. Random Street Violence
c. A Car Accident Due to an Unsafe Truck
d. A Routine Trip to the Hospital
e. A Badly Filled Perscription
Even though Americans are focused on a. Terrorism to a degree of irrational paranoia, the fact is you are far more likely to die of the other preventable causes of death listed above. Why the concern for terrorism? Because Bush & Cheney know it's what gets people all hot under the collar to vote Republican.
Posted by: Rock_nj at September 19, 2004 06:50 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
josh, just have to comment on the recent posts here. pepe makes some good clear points. if you see something wrong with an organization you are involved with i think you should speak up, not "keep it to yourself". i have been active in dem campaigns for the past 20 years. i am a member of the dnc, and i am not thrilled right now either. i can - and frequently do - note at least a dozen good reasons why bush has no business being potus, and none of them have to do with what kerry did in vietnam which was THE focal point of our convention. the gop has succeeded completely in sinking this election into a morass of meaningless topics doused in a thick coating of fear. the only remedy is to start talking about what america should be doing differently. if kerry does that NOW he still has a great chance to win, but if we all fall into the pattern of attack and react karl rove will continue to control the tempo of this election and it doesn't matter whether it's a tie or bush is up by 13 right now, the dems won't win. let's all make an effort (in the real world at least) to talk more about health care policy, jobs creation, protecting the enviroment, getting out of hock to china and the saudis, and an rational plan for cleaning up the mess in iraq. if our party is struggling to get the message out maybe we can do it one person at a time. thanks for listening.
Posted by: patio at September 19, 2004 10:43 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
football sport book gambling new england patriot football betting basketball betting line sports betting gambling nfl gambling football gambling college football gambling online canada sports betting baseball gambling system bill buffalo football gambling pro baseball sports betting football online gambling keyword sports gambling basketball sports betting football betting guide sports betting service american football betting football gambling ncaa online basketball gambling line sports gambling casino interactive sports betting football gambling england football gambling new patriot football gambling site free football betting line forum gambling offshore sports football sports betting line ncaa football betting spread baseball betting sport bookie free sports betting line football betting spread football gambling information
Posted by: Roy at November 12, 2004 12:39 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment