| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 7/15 |
| 2004/10/25-26 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34330 Activity:high |
10/25 Can this be? Will Bush really win again? I hope that http://CNN.com poll is not accurate of the american public's true opinion.. \_ The poll results are diverging; there's too much noise in the system. -tom \_ What is your source for diverging polls? Try this: http://www.realclearpolitics.com http://www.realclearpolitics.com \_ http://pollingreport.com but they have the same data. Try plotting the polls against each other; they were much closer to converged in August and September. -tom \_ http://pollingreport2.com/#bars http://csua.org/u/9n5 (Post graphic) CNN uses Gallup. Zogby said Gallup sucks. \_ "My competitor sucks! Buy my product instead!" \_ http://simonworld.mu.nu/archives/050971.php "While being diplomatic, Zogby basically said Gallup's numbers are junk. They use different methodologies but Gallup's variations from poll to poll are too big to be creditable. In Zogby's polling Kerry and Bush both bounce between 44 an 48, and haven't deviated from that range." blah, blah, you can read the rest. \_ Translation, "Buy my election reports! I can only make real money every 4 years with a small bonus lump during mid-terms!" \_ You're supposed to also check both URLs to see how Gallup compares to other polls. The Post also has Kerry over Dubya today by 1% (yes, statistical tie, but the trend is up). IMO, Zogby is trying to make an honest analysis of why the other guy sucks - but the only vindication will come the day after the election (and it would be really funny if the numbers came out exactly half-way between Zogby and Gallup). \_ So? Zogby has Bush up 48%-45%. The 3% spread is within the MOE, but it's still hardly cheery news. \_ Zogby's poll has 6% Unsure, and that number has consistently been in the 6% to 9% range since July. That is very odd, since almost every other poll has the unsure number in the 1% to 3% range. \_ Traditionally you get the Not Sure number down by nagging the respondent for an answer "which way do you lean" until they break down. This suggests that Zogby's people didn't nag that hard. \_ It's a possibility/nightmare. My big hope is that the huge turnout combined with cell phone only young crowd will prove the pollsters wrong. \_ Sheesh, you guys put up a hugh douchebag as your canidate, and then you're surprised when he has a hard time beating the opposing idiot? \_ Can you coherently explain why Kerry is a douchebag? Or are you just a right wing troll trying to assuage your unease by tossing around ad hominem nonsense? If you can explain coherently, then please -- I'd welcome the post. \_ Dubya has never lost a debate! (until this year) \_ They are both douchebags. Don't kid yourself. \_ That's my point. When you're whole campaign is "Don't vote for that douchebag, vote for THIS douchebag!" Don't be surprised when it's hard to get a majority of the vote. \_ obhttp://www.johnkerryisadouchebagbutimvotingforhimanyway.com \_ Don't let the wrong lizard get elected. \_ The poll numbers are way off. They don't take into account a sizable number of people who vote for Democrats every election but don't have land lines: dead people. \_ Do you have any evidence at all for this endlessly repeated assertion, other than the Cook County, Illinois allegations from 1960? \_ What happened in Cook County, Illinois in 1960? \_ There was some evidence that Richard Daley's machine was using the names of dead people in Cook County to cast votes for John F. Kennedy. Nixon decided not to pursue it, perhaps because he thought that even if a lot of votes were invalidated, he still would have lost. \_ JFK would have won even without Illinois. \_ And the battleground states in this election don't have dead people. So even if the dead do determine the winner in IL, it still won't matter. Right. \_ Wow. You never responded to my question. You have absolutely no evidence of any of this, do you? You need to stop blathering. \_ I'm not the original Cook County poster. I'm merely questioning the logic of the poster that implied that dead people voting in this election is immaterial since the dead votes didn't affect the outcome of the 1960 election. -pp \_ Of course you have no evidence of dead people voting in this election either. So you are either paranoid, or just making shit up. Or both. \_ You do realize that claiming that there is no evidence of a huge turn-out amongst the dead in this election (what you just claimed) is quite different than claiming that a turn-out by the dead would be irrelevant (which is what a poster tried to imply earlier). I have no problem with the no evidence claim, especially since I'm not the dead-voter guy to start with. I do have a problem with the irrelevant claim, since I am somewhat fond of logic. \_ You cannot make that claim until *after* the election is over. I think that one side or the other will win pretty handily. |
| 7/15 |
|
| www.realclearpolitics.com GOP Hold (Bunning-R*) CURRENT TALLY: Based on RCP Avgs and the latest polls: today, the GOP wou ld pick up seats in FL, NC, SC, and GA; This would leave Republicans with a one-seat net pick-up with the Democrats still having to defend SD and LA. "Looking" Kerry-Edwards Well, you know, I don't know Laura Bush. But she seems to be calm, and sh e has a sparkle in her eye, which is good. But I don't know that she's e ver had a real job I mean, since she's been grown up. So her experience and her validation comes from important things, different things. We can argue about what would have been the best way to d epose Saddam, but this report makes it crystal clear that this insatiabl e tyrant needed to be deposed. He was the menace, and, as the world dith ered, he was winning his struggle. |
| pollingreport.com SEARCH engine, or access featured topics via the links on the right. Data are from national probability-sample surveys of the American public. Additional data -- including state-by-state presidential, congressional, and gubernatorial polls -- plus analyses by leading pollsters, are available to subscribers. |
| pollingreport2.com/#bars com National Multicandidate Trial Heat Chart This chart is based on trial heat questions matching Bush, Kerry and one or more third-party candidates. The white space down the center -- betwe en the Bush and Kerry bar segments -- represents respondents who favor o ther candidates or who are undecided. |
| csua.org/u/9n5 -> www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/elections/2004/charting.html Presidential Money Race (8/1/04 - 8/31/04) BUSH-CHENEY '04 Cash on Hand (8/31/04) $369 million Total Contributions $185 million Total Disbursements $142 million KERRY-EDWARDS '04 Cash on Hand (8/31/04) $620 million Federal Funds $746 million Total Disbursements $103 million Note: The Bush-Cheney '04 campaign received federal funds shortly after P resident Bush accepted the Republican presidential nomination on Sept. Kerry ac cepted the Democratic nomination July 29 and his campaign was then limit ed to spending only federal funds. Campaign Finance Reports: Party Money Republican National Committee $93,577,251 National Republican Congressional Committee $25,587,757 National Republican Senatorial Committee $22,488,596 TOTAL $141,653,604 Democratic National Committee $55,671,864 Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee $20,848,852 Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee $10,584,957 TOTAL $87,105,673 Most Visited States Updated 10/25/04Tracking of campaign visits started o n March 3, 2004 after it was clear that Sen. John F Kerry was going to be the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. com's Pundits' Picks lists are compiled of races that some of Washington's top non-partisan analysts say are "toss ups" or "too cl ose to call" in November's election. These are the congressional and gub ernatorial races that are likely to be the most hotly contested in the c ountry. For a race to be included on our list, it must be picked by at l east one of these analysts: Charlie Cook, Stuart Rothenberg, Congression al Quarterly's political staff, or Larry Sabato. The numbers next to eac h race indicate the number of analysts that included the race on their l ist. Most E-mailed Content Week of October 18 Here are the five most popular political features sent by washingtonpost. |
| simonworld.mu.nu/archives/050971.php eponymous polling firm gave a talk in Hon g Kong on the state of the current election. His speech covered a wide n umber of topics and thoughts on the election. Zogby himself is a Democra t but takes pains to eliminate bias from his surveys. He also had a few words about his polling rivals, especially Gallup. "The Armageddon Election" Differences between red and blue states and the key predictor of voting intention (it's not what you think) The missing centre of American politics Mistakes in the Kerry and Bush campaigns The Nader impact The impact of blogs and the internet on elections and politics. For the most part they are in the order he spoke, with some cutting and pasting where similar topics were discussed. Undecideds * The undecided vote is down to about 6% of voters. In past elections in March the num ber of undecideds is around 20-25%. He takes care to maintain the same proportion of politica l affiliations in these groups to keep consistency. The election is bigge r than the two personalities involved. Zogby was very clear that once they move out of a camp, a voter the n tosses up between not voting or voting for "their" candidate. Very few are prepared to jump across the gap to the other candidate. All he can do is keep challenging Kerry and raising enough questions about him that it ke eps the undecideds at home. He's made it h ard for people to support Kerry because the US cannot pull out of Iraq s o there's little Kerry can do; it's unlikely multilateral support will s tream in for Iraq regardless; and there's little Kerry can do to fund hi s education and health plans given the big deficits, even with his tax h ike on the wealthy. Tactics * He cannot understand why the Democrats have pulled out of Arizona, Colo rado and Missouri, among others. His polling is showing those states as close enough to at least force the Republicans onto the back foot. He al so thinks the Democrats lost momentum in the South after appointing John Edwards, especially in potentially winnable Virginia and North Carolina . The Christian Conservative Myth * The 4 million Christian Conservatives (CCs) that Karl Rove obsesses abo ut are a myth. He has done extensive polling and found no evidence that there were large numbers of CCs who chose to stay at home in 2000. As Zo gby put it, why would these people choose not to vote knowing that could land Al Gore in the White House? Blue * This election is a repeat of 2000 in many ways, and Florida and Ohio ar e the key states this time. On eve ry poll this is the key predictor of voting intention, even when broken down by sex and age. The Missing Centre * In the past the candidates tend to move to the centre in the last few w eeks of the campaign and sound similar as they fight over the middle gro und. This time each candidate is talking to their bases as if the centre doesn't exist - because it doesn't. Bush won in 2000 with 48% of the popular vot e but rather than reaching for the centre, he started out from the right (Zogby though this was a squandered opportunity). The 4 million Christi an Conservative "myth" of Karl Rove meant Bush wanted to pander to them to shore his support up and push his numbers up over 50% and hold them t here for 4 years, rather than reach across to conservative Al Gore voter s This explains why Bush quickly rescinded Clinton's environmental orde rs and decision on Government money for family planning groups that supp ort abortion - he was chasing the CCs. incident when Bush was ta lking to a group of iron workers, police and firefighters at Ground Zero (when some called out "We can't hear you", Bush responded "I can hear y ou. And the people who knocked these bu ildings down will hear from of all us soon," as two key attempts to conn ect with the entire population. When asked would the support the Wo T if it lasted one year, it went down to 77%; Zogby took this to mean the US still suffered from a post-Vietnam syndrome of wanting wars won quickly and troops out of harms way as quickly as possible. Post bombing bounces to 67% but the bounce didn't last long: by mid-May he was back to 50% and it didn't budge. Over the ( northern) Summer of 2003 the opposition to the war on Iraq turned angry, and that is the first time that talk of the "stolen" 2000 election emer ged. In December 2003, when Sadaam was captured, Bush went to 56% but within 2 weeks was back to 50% again. The Democrats * Before the primaries started 66 - 73% of registered Democrats in key st ates thought they couldn't beat Bush. When asked, they stated in 2:1 rat io they wanted someone they believed in rather than someone who could be at Bush. By December Dean was up 7% in Iowa, 36% in New Hampshire and a couple of points in South Carolin a Dean's problem was the primaries happened too late. Zogby cannot expl ain why but he didn't poll between Christmas and New Year. When polling restarted in January 2004 suddenly things shifted. The new polls had 85% of Democrats thought a Democrat could beat Bush and now in 3:1 ratio th ey wanted someone who could win. There had been too much "nuance" and explanations that would fi t trains, not bumper stickers. Zogby said "Presidential candidates need bumper stickers, not trains." Suddenly in January 2004 his message was s implified to three points: I can win, I'm a veteran and I'm experienced. He gained a point a day while Gephardt and Dean lost a point a day each and so once Kerry won Iowa the momentum was unstoppable. once his numbers crossed Dean's then Kerry's num bers took off and didn't look back. The Presidential debate was another example of this, getting th e message right at the right time (although hopefully not too late). His latest numbers are showing 46 Kerry 45 Bush but no clues on the undecideds still. Money * It is unusual but at this stage of the race Kerry has more money than B ush to spend. The Running * The race is Kerry's to lose, barring unforeseen events. Three other key po lling indicators are all terrible for Bush amongst undecideds: - Presidential job performance: 35% positive versus 60% negative - Is the country headed in the right direction? These numbers have always been net negative for Bush amongst undecideds. The last 3 Presidents with those numbers were Carter, Ford and Bush snr. Zogby sees them going like in Reagan in 1980, so that the margin is 2% but it is t he same in each key state and it is in favour of Kerry, thus the Elector al Vote ends in a decisive victory. A nything over 107 million this time and Kerry will win. Neither side will back down and it will be complete chaos, far wor se than 2000. Nader * Nader is a spent force and irrelevant to the campaign. He i s using higher weights this time compared to 2000 due to increased activ ism. Differences between polls * While being diplomatic, Zogby basically said Gallup's numbers are junk. They use different methodologies but Gallup's variations from poll to p oll are too big to be creditable. In Zogby's polling Kerry and Bush both bounce between 44 an 48, and haven't deviated from that range. Asia in the election * There are three Asian issues in this election: North Korea, the Chinese currency, Taiwan. outsourcing, but th at was overlooked despite it perhaps being the most prominent issue of t he four. In 1996 about 4% of voters go t most of their political information from the net. Firstly Howard Dean, the n John Kerry have used the internet to balance out and neutralise the fu ndraising power of Bush and the Republicans. Ironically Al Gore, the "fa ther" of the net, didn't capture this avenue in 2000. My thoughts: Zogby has an obvious personal bias to Democrats but I take h im at face value when he says his research is impartial. His speculation that the race is Kerry's to lose didn't convince me, but nor do I buy t hat it is Bush's to lose either. I think the struggle for both candidate s now is to go and win the race. Otherwise his thoughts on the missing c entre certainly make sense and gel with my impressions of American polit ics (admittedly from afar). The small amount of undecideds are the key b attleground, but I'm not sure they will break for Kerry in the numbers Z ogby exp... |
| CNN.com -> www.cnn.com/ About 250 prisoners freed from Abu Ghraib The United States today freed about 250 detainees from Abu Ghraib prison, site of alleged abuses that prompted global outrage and led to days of hearings on Capitol Hill. Today marks the first mass prisoner release since the abuse scandal broke several weeks ago. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had visited the prison Thursday. |