« Rasmussen Pennsylvania Poll | Main | Johnny Sunshine Does Good in OR »
Wednesday, September 15, 2004
Two More Gallup Polls (MI & WI)
Posted by DavidNYCGallup hits two midwestern states. First up, Michigan (registered voters, no trendlines):
Kerry: 50
Bush: 43
Other/Undecided: 7
(MoE: ��4%)
Nader gets a point here, in case you were curious. Gallup's notoriously right-leaning likely voter model doesn't help Bush much here - with LVs, it's 50-44. The jerky boys at CNN think that a six-point gap with a four-point MoE means the race is "too close to call." Time for some basic math lessons (though virtually all the media is guilty of this flawed reasoning).
And here's a bit of welcome turn of events: RVs oppose Michigan's gay marriage-banning amendment by a margin of 51-44. I have no idea if either side has done any advertising on this issue, so this figure may jump around a bit by Nov. 2nd.
It's a good news-bad news set of polls, so now I'm gonna give you the bad news, in the form of Wisconsin (registered voters, late August in parens):
Kerry: 45 (49)
Bush: 50 (46)
Other/Undecided: 5 (5)
(MoE: ��4%)
I never base my beliefs about where a state will head on a single poll - but an eight-point swing kinda sucks. As we get further and further from the RNC, I'm less inclined to believe in any kind of bounce, especially since national polling hasn't shown much of one. The conventional wisdom says that WI and IA are our two most vulnerable blue states, and this poll certainly doesn't seem to disprove that.
So what happens if we lose WI? Well, assuming nothing else changes, Florida would rescue us, and Ohio would also, just barely - we'd get 270 EVs on the nose that way. If we lose both WI & IA and win FL... then we're again back to 270. This analysis excludes NH, which most observers believe will turn blue this year. An unlikely but possible way to win without WI & IA would be to take NH, NV and OH, for a landslide win with a whopping 272 EVs. I'll take it.
Posted at 12:12 AM in Michigan, Wisconsin | Technorati
Comments
Per the latest polls things aren't looking good for Kerry in OH, FL or MO either.
Posted by: David at September 15, 2004 11:52 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Only if you're ignoring Zogby, who had Kerry up in both MO and FL in his last poll on 9/7.
Posted by: DavidNYC at September 15, 2004 12:14 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Kerry has slowly bounced back from Bush's convention bounce. Actually, not looking so bad anymore. It looks like the perfect set up for the debates. Kerry will have to shine in the debates.
Posted by: Rock_nj at September 15, 2004 12:58 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Why is Wisconsin up for Bush and Minnesota going for Kerry? Strange...
Posted by: joseph at September 15, 2004 01:13 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
David and DavidNYC---I wouldn't trust any polls from Florida this week or last. With people in the panhandle evacuating, I'd expect a "swing towards Kerry" in the next couple of days.
Posted by: science at September 15, 2004 01:17 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I think our only hope is as someone else here said, that Kerry must leave Bush in the dust during the debates. What worries me is supposedly "stupid" Bush has beaten worthy opponents like McCaine and Gore in the past.
The most significant battlegrounds seem to be shifting from the Bush states of four years ago to the states that voted for Gore in that election. This is a very disconcerting development, and it started even before the Republican Convention.
Posted by: Pepe at September 15, 2004 01:25 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
OH isn't looking too bad now. The Rasmussen 7 day tracking poll has Kerry and Bush tied.
Strategic Vision has Kerry down 8 points in OH, but I do not trust Strategic Vision polls. They are very partisan and slanted towards Bush.
Posted by: DFuller at September 15, 2004 01:41 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I don't expect OH to swing to Kerry in November--it's been pretty much in Bush's column all summer long, much as MI has been faithful to Kerry. Looks like Kerry will have to do all he can to win in MO or FL, since OH looks rather bleak. With the economy in the Buckeye State such a mess, I still can't fully grasp why more Ohioans aren't excited about John Kerry as an alternative. And I say this is a native Ohioan, though I left my home state two decades ago.
Posted by: Pepe at September 15, 2004 01:49 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Per a news source, the MN poll is bias leaning to the left.
Posted by: david at September 15, 2004 02:29 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
OK, you talked about the Wisconsin poll but ignored the Rasmussen Poll........
WISCONSIN Bush 49, Kerry 47
within the margin of error
Ramussen's paid polling has
Bush 2 up in Ohio, also within the
margin of error.
Posted by: RH at September 15, 2004 02:34 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
The Washington Post this morning had an article about Kerry making the gaffe of refering to LamBERT field, and Bush and then Cheney making hay out of it.
Aside from it being the obvious nod to the great Steeler linbacker Jack Lambert, I expect that this is at worst a non-issue and at best a trap for Bush-Cheney. Football fans, within a few hours after the game, and after the beer has worn off, generally understand very well that football is football and that a President will hopefully be concerned about more important things. At least the football fans that vote.
Posted by: Marsden at September 15, 2004 03:59 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Football fans, within a few hours after the game, and after the beer has worn off, generally understand very well that football is football and that a President will hopefully be concerned about more important things. At least the football fans that vote.
That would be true if you were referring to normal football fans. However, up in Wisconsin you're talking about the Cheese Heads--it's an entirely different creature from the mere football fan, and in Wisconsin they are omnipresent!
Posted by: Pepe at September 15, 2004 04:54 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I have said this before but you folks are falling into the 2000 trap. Ohio flirts with the GOP but if worked can vote Democrat. Some urban county boards of elections are predicting 70-80% turnout. The GOP in Ohio are trying to keep the family together for Bush, and then expecting to have many fights for the next few years. They are in disarray, and they are afraid of ACT who has 10-12 field offices all over the state.
Posted by: pc at September 15, 2004 05:16 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I am from Iowa and work in sales in both MN, IA and WI. The social issues in the rural areas are turning these once liberal areas into conservative states. The people continuing to live in upper Midwest are conservative. Anti-abortion key. You see many anti-abortion signs on highways, many more than in "religous" Southern states. The population is getting older, the prices on crops and livestock are UP. The only question is will Bush will all three or just 2 of three.
Posted by: tscott at September 15, 2004 11:59 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I am from Iowa and work in sales in both MN, IA and WI. The social issues in the rural areas are turning these once liberal areas into conservative states. The people continuing to live in upper Midwest are conservative. Anti-abortion key. You see many anti-abortion signs on highways, many more than in "religous" Southern states. The population is getting older, the prices on crops and livestock are UP. The only question is will Bush will all three or just 2 of three.
Posted by: troyscott at September 16, 2004 12:01 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Hmmm.... Thanks for the inside info. That's what I suspected. There really isn't much difference between Ds and Rs on economic issues anymore. Now, people mainly vote on economic issues.
Posted by: Rock_nj at September 16, 2004 06:48 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
That Kerry could lose the Upper Midwest in November is very disconcerting, but many people seem to see that area becoming increasingly GOP territory. At least according to the polls, he has not yet trailed in IO, has he? I think Kerry can hold onto IO and MN, but he will have to spend more time and money there than he probably had planned. It doesn't look good in WI, though. Looks like that state is swinging, just like NH is for Kerry. Unfortunately, WI is a much bigger prize than tiny NH.
Posted by: Pepe at September 16, 2004 07:00 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I live in Minnesota as well. Certainly the anti-abortion vote in the Upper Midwest accounts for a very high percentage of the overall electorate here. In my county's Democratic Caucus, a resolution to put in the party platform that a woman's right to choose be sacrosanct was rejected. This is not unusual. I drive by a bunch of small towns with anti-abortion signs (almost always funded by a single group), yet which vote overwhelmingly Democrat nonetheless. The tiny Minnesota-South Dakota border town of Beardsley is a good example. No fewer than two large anti-abortion signs on both sides of town, yet in 2000, Al Gore beat George Bush 76 votes to 40....nearly 2-1, yet still soft for the kind of numbers that town usually does for Dems.
The dynamics of the three states voting trendlines couldn't be different. Iowa has historically been a Republican state that remains socially conservative, but is becoming increasingly populist as its economy stagnates. Wisconsin is very politically fragmented, with an even number of Democratic strongholds, Republican strongholds and swing areas. Minnesota is being overwhelmed by suburban sprawl, clogging up once Democratic rural areas with massive new housing developments filled with conservative yuppies stretching as far as 50 miles from the core metro area. I expect if Bush does win these three states (and I highly doubt he'll win Iowa), it will be because of wide margins in suburban areas. My guess is that Kerry breaks pretty close to even in the rural areas, despite their social conservatism.
Posted by: Mark at September 16, 2004 08:41 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I meant to say that since economic differences between the parties are somewhat irrelevant now, that people tend to vote more based on social issues. Sure, Bush is outsourcing our jobs, but Clinton signed NAFTA and was fully in favor of GATT. Perhaps Kerry can change this fact, which would help the Dems in the long run, by focusing more on domestic issues and using the federal government to retain and create new jobs. Certainly, the abortion issue has helped the GOP in recent years. The Presidential elections in the 1990s were won in the Mid West.
Posted by: Rock_nj at September 16, 2004 09:59 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
George W. Bush leads John Kerry in New Jersey by a 49%-45% margin, according to a Survey USA poll conducted for WABC-TV in New York and WCAU in Philadelphia. The poll was conducted September 12-14 of 781 likely voters with a 3.7% margin of error. (09/15/04)
http://www.politicsnj.com/
That's a big surprise! I still think Kerry wins NJ.
Posted by: Rock_nj at September 16, 2004 10:39 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment