|
First full post-convention poll - Kerry loses ground
|
View this Thread in Original format
| imokruok |
So, I'm sure the reasons for this can be debated, but I'll start with my own observance.
The Democratic party is still voting against Bush, not for Kerry and/or Edwards. The more that the swing voters see of the two of them, the less that they like them. Combine this with Kerry's keynote address as compared to the three that came before him - all had far more insightful commentary and better delivery. The bottom line is that there was no "bounce" - the first time since 1972.
Can the Democrats hide their candidate from the public for the next three months? Victory may depend on it.
Here's the story:
| quote: |
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politi...oll-kerry_x.htm
Sunday, August 1, 2004
Poll: No boost for Kerry after convention
By Susan Page, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — The Democratic National Convention boosted voters' perceptions of John Kerry's leadership on critical issues, a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll finds. But it failed to give him the expected bump in the head-to-head race against President Bush.
In the survey, taken Friday and Saturday, the Democratic ticket of Kerry and John Edwards trailed the Republican ticket of Bush and Dick Cheney 50% to 46% among likely voters, with independent candidate Ralph Nader at 2%.
Before the convention, the two were essentially tied, with Kerry at 47%, Bush at 46%.
The change in support was within the poll's margin of error of +/- 4 percentage points in the sample of 763 likely voters. But it was nonetheless a stunning result, the first time in the Gallup Poll since the 1972 Democratic convention that a candidate seemed to lose ground at his convention.
USA TODAY extended its survey Sunday night and tonight to get a fuller picture of what's happening with the electorate.
A Newsweek survey taken Thursday and Friday showed the Democrats with a lead of 49% to 42%, a four-point bounce compared with a poll taken three weeks earlier — the smallest in the history of the Newsweek poll.
Analysts say the lack of a boost for Kerry may reflect the intensely polarized contest. Nearly nine of 10 voters say in the survey that they are confident they won't change their mind between now and the Nov. 2 election. That leaves little room for a candidate to gain support even when major events occur.
|
Addendum: I guess a more entertaining way to look at this is from the other way. Instead of Kerry losing ground, Bush got a bounce from the Democratic convention. |
|
|
| LiquidX |
| Interesting... yet, It says on newsweek that he got a 4 point jump, though, not enough... different polls are showing different results for this matter. Shows how such a death heat this is. |
|
|
| biznology |
another case of reading and examining statistics...
almost EIGHT HUNDRED people said that they were tied. is Bush gonna take solace in that when there are ehmmm 300 million people in the US?
it could be right, but it is USAToday and too small of a sample population| |
|
|
| imokruok |
800 is enough for a nationwide sample. You can do a nationwide poll with about 600, and some will go as high as 1,600. For some mathematical reason, once you get past 600, the curve for accuracy starts to go flat.
Gallup did the poll, commissioned by USA Today and CNN. |
|
|
| LiquidX |
| quote: | Originally posted by imokruok
800 is enough for a nationwide sample. You can do a nationwide poll with about 600, and some will go as high as 1,600. For some mathematical reason, once you get past 600, the curve for accuracy starts to go flat.
Gallup did the poll, commissioned by USA Today and CNN. |
Well, I really need to see more polls and such, since from what Ive heard, on polls from ABC and other well respected and accurate.. show Kerry with that slight lead and polls have been jumping ever since the convention.. but thats yet to be shown on the figures, buy from what you have, its only USAtoday, while Newsweek shows something differently then what USAtoday's polls show.. I guess that by the beginning of the week or mid- there should be some more commentators to that.. we'll be coming back to this thread on that. |
|
|
| NYCTrancefan |
| quote: | Originally posted by imokruok
So, I'm sure the reasons for this can be debated, but I'll start with my own observance.
The Democratic party is still voting against Bush, not for Kerry and/or Edwards. The more that the swing voters see of the two of them, the less that they like them. Combine this with Kerry's keynote address as compared to the three that came before him - all had far more insightful commentary and better delivery. The bottom line is that there was no "bounce" - the first time since 1972.
Can the Democrats hide their candidate from the public for the next three months? Victory may depend on it.
Here's the story:
Addendum: I guess a more entertaining way to look at this is from the other way. Instead of Kerry losing ground, Bush got a bounce from the Democratic convention. |
Oh no there goes the election, Bush in a landslide folks:stongue: just like in the prior elections, right?
Here's a more entertaining way to look at it, Bush will continue to screw up in Iraq as if his administration could anymore. More terror warnings will be issued leading up to the elections, like the one's today for NY, DC, and New Jersey. The Republicans would do better to hide Bush because with every word he speaks people see him for what he truly is a man of delusion that believes Iraq is on the right path, America is safer in the world and the spending under his administration will rectify itself in five years as he claims:haha: What a :clown: |
|
|
| speedracer_mec |
damn i was wrong......(good thing i was wrong though;) )
It appears after viewing several polls.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5568072/site/newsweek/
"Kerry’s four-point “bounce” is the smallest in the history of the NEWSWEEK poll".
Bush has 75 Million dollars to spend between now and the RNC to destroy his Senate record showing he is the #1 Liberal in the Senate.
One week after the RNC you will see Bush pulling away.
So much for the big bounce for Kerry from the DNC.
This other poll shows,
| quote: |
Bush leading 50 to 47 among likely voters in new GALLUPUSATODAYCNN poll
CNN -- Late Edition Primetime
Sun Aug 01 2004
WOLF: we're also getting new information, the first new poll numbers since the democratic convention. they're coming in right now and they're showing an apparent difference between registered voters and likely voters. here to explain exactly what's going on our senior political analyst bill schneider. bill, this is the latest cnn/""usa today""/gallup poll. these are numbers that were completely taken, this poll since john kerry's acceptance speech. i want to show our viewers what the numbers show so far. among registered voters, this is important, registered voters, john kerry is now at 50% compared to george w. bush at 47%. you see what it was before the convention, 49/45 in favor of kerry. among likely voters, though, take a look at this. a difference, likely voters, 50% for bush, 47% for kerry. a reversal, the margin of error, though, 3% in this poll you see. well, first of all, explain the difference between registered and likely voters.
SCHNEIDER: wolf, about three-quarters of americans are registered to vote but in the presidential election typically only about half or a little bit over half will turn out to vote. so what the gallup poll does is screen people according to their interests, their intention to vote, their enthusiasm and screen out the 50% who in the typical presidential election are likely to vote. so, if this election is a typical presidential election, the likely voters show a slight lead for bush but if turnout is higher than that, and we get more registered voters actually voting that should help kerry.
WOLF: what do these numbers say about the so-called bounce out of this democratic convention?
SCHNEIDER: no bounce and that's striking. they show there might have been a very brief bounce, not a bounce but a blip i'd call it among people interviewed on friday after the convention kerry was ahead by five points. we continued to interview on saturday and those people -- bush moved into a slight lead of two points. we will continue to interview people but this looks like the shortest bounce on record.
WOLF: is that because the country basically had already made up their mind? there wasn't a whole lot of room for undecides? that's what the democrats keep saying.
SCHNEIDER: looks like they had a point. what we're see showing is before the convention the democrats were hugely enthusiastic about voting. over three-quarters said they were more enthusiastic than usual. after the convention the number of democrats who said they were enthusiastic went up only slightly. they already had their bounce but what really changed is that the republicans, the bush voters went way up in enthusiasm gaining eight points so it looks like, yes, the convention rallied voters but it rallied republicans more than democrats. the only good news for democrat, democrats are still more enthusiastic about voting than republicans are.
WOLF: we'll get more on these numbers throughout ""late edition."" thanks for that.
Developing...
|
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash4.htm |
|
|
| NYCTrancefan |
Why would Kerry need a big bounce when you consider that Bush is the incumbent and yet he is increasingly losing ground to Kerry. I wouldn't blame you for trying to dampen the fact that Kerry is still ahead of Bush whatever way it is twisted. Shameful for an incumbent candidate.
The elections are some ways off that's not good for Bush because it will get a lot worse in Iraq before it gets better, as the current path indicates. If Iraq is going to be a factor in the elections that stands to be a major negative for Bush, face it Americans are disgusted with Iraq and what is happening. How far will Bush run from Iraq by November and what accompanies it, violence, lack of security, a state now rife with terrorists, daily attacks on U.S. troops(most which aren't even reported) and that's just Iraq alone. |
|
|
| imokruok |
| quote: | Originally posted by NYCTrancefan
Shameful for an incumbent candidate.
|
Actually, it's quite common. Dukakis led Bush 41 at several points during the campaign, and Mondale polled well against Reagan too. The big breaks in the numbers happen very close to election day, at which point the statistics usually break for one person almost entirely. What is shameful is that Kerry isn't polling better. He should have had a convention bounce.
The Bush/Gore election was an exception to the rule, as evidenced by the close race in numerous states like Wisconsin, Florida, and New Mexico. Those who had them polling even come election day were accurate. |
|
|
| LiquidX |
| If you got AOL, try the Straw Vote, which is obviously not the most accurate, but it shows what people are voting for by state.. just like a real election. So far, Kerry is winning 300+ of the electorate votes.. while Bush only 100+.. Interesting, if you have AOL, try and look at it. |
|
|
| BadBadNeil |
| Yeah the only way to do a more realistic prediction is to go state by state and do 800 per state. You also have to make sure you include a percentage of minorities as they are related to the percentage of our total population as blacks and hispanics tend to vote along certain party lines. |
|
|
| Galapidate |
| Just wait for the vote in November. Any taken now is off target because it only shows the votes of people who are definitely voting for whomever. Just wait to include those from swing states and independents. If I'm not mistaken, they make up about 10-15% of the votes in America. |
|
|
|
|
