www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_110104/content/stack_a.guest.html
dig to find the positive numbers the partisan press is ignoring i n their own polls) BEGIN TRANSCRIPT I promise we're going to go through some of the polling as it exists toda y and some of the analysis of it, and I'm doing this because there is su ch a breathless interest in this, and so many people are hanging on the polling for your mood. Many people are, you know, poll to poll, analyst to analyst, update to update for their moods -- and I understand this. I wish it weren't the case because you're really transferring a lot of po wer to these pollsters when you do that. I mean, if they all said the sa me thing, then you might be able to say, "Okay, something's happening," but they're all not saying the same. They're all over the ballpark, and so I bet you're on a seesaw or roller coaster. Then you'll see another poll that says something di fferent: "Oh, no!" Most people tend to believe the negative rather tha n the positive. Most people think their team is going to lose the big ga me in the Super Bowl than will win it.
So you get subjected to your emotions going on a roller coaster on these up-and-down polls, and I maintain that that's part and parcel of some of the media spin that's happening. I think all of the reporting on this early voting or much of it is designed to affect your mood. I t hink this endless parade of people that you see in Florida or everywhere else there's early voting, there's a sort of an implication there that this is the result of Democrat voter registration, because that's all we 've heard about is early voting.
So we see the pictures to go along with what's being reported. They've already beaten us to the polls," and blah, blah. Don't fall for all that, because nobo dy knows what's going to happen here. It has happened sporadically on occasion, not really in presidentia l races. But I would just love to see, because of all of the different v ariables here, I would just love to see all these polls be as wrong as t hey have ever, ever been. That to me would be almost as exciting as Kerr y being vanquished by the same large number that the polls I hope are wr ong by.
poll, and they release d three different results in this poll. There were registered voters, li kely voters and a new definition of likely voters, and in the old conven tional way of reporting likely voters, Bush was up eight nationwide in t he horse race: 52-43. It was nine, whatever it was, an eight- or nine-po int spread. But Gallup said: We're not sure if we can use the convention al likely voter definition because there may be a new one that we need, in that one it's only a two-point race. "Likely voters" is the sample th is year of people who definitely voted last election. But the new likely voter definition includes people who didn't vote last year but registered for the first time this year who damn so mad they ca n't wait to get out there and vote. So you throw people who have never v oted before into a likely voter pool. This has to brea k down in some professor's statistics class, and as you will hear, when I finally get to my poll -- wait till you hear what Gallup did today in order to show a tie. They just made an assumption that the undec ideds are going to break 90% for Kerry, to close the gap in one of these polls here.
Michael Barone makes an interesting point here and I want to ec ho this. Conventional wisdom, the old CW , it's a staple in American politics, and it becomes a staple of their r eporting of American politics. What is the conventional wisdom of this electi on if you had to say? I'll ask you, Mr Snerdley, since you're a keen ob server. I'll specify for you because I don't want to confuse you here with a big universe of possible answers. What is the conventional wisdom of how this election is going to be decided?
The conventional wisdom is that law yers are going to be suing. Conventional wisdom is John Kerry is going t o declare victory if he loses. If you take a lo ok at statistical analysis, what are the odds, folks, that you have in a number of states the scenario we had in Florida last time around? What are the Kerry lawyers primarily focusing on these provisional ballots? T hey're not focusing on people actually show up and vote. What made Florida possible was that there w ere only 1,200 votes separating after the first count last year.
But in New Hampshire last time, the Gore campaign couldn't find a way to challenge Bush in New Hampshire because the margin was 7,000 votes but t hey wanted to. They just couldn't find a way that would whittle that dow n But with all these provisional ballots and all this early registratio n, the conventional wisdom is that lawyers are going to decide this race . The conventional wisdom is often wrong, and we'll just have to wait an d see on Tuesday night if it proves out to be. First, in the in order I have it here, it's the order it came in. Now, just last week, this bunch asked their entire staff, interns, janitors, editors, writers, to voice their preference, and it was like thirty-three for Kerry and three for Bush, a nd one of the people that was for Bush was Bill Saletan, William Saletan .
Election Scorecard today where the pre sidential race stands today: "If the election were held today, Bush would be the winner with 286 elect oral votes. He has far less room to maneuver, far fewer roots to get to 270 than does Bush." Here's their analysis of these numbers as of no on today: "Last night, we warned that Florida and Ohio were on a knife's edge and that Kerry couldn't survive if he lost both. This morning, we got two polls that nudged both states ever so slightly back to Bush. Now , the only reason we've had these slates leaning one way or the other in the last 24 hours is that we decided at the outset of this project to a llocate even the iffiest states. So when you look at all the data, Flori da and Ohio are tossups, by favoring one criterion over another you can make a solid argument for either candidate in either state. We warned la st night not to make too much of Kerry's 299, which it was last night. Now, in USA Today the re's a poll today that has the race tied 49-49. Nationwide USA Today/CNN /Gallup poll shows an extraordinarily bitter and expensive campaign prep ared to end. Have you seen the CBS/New York Times poll with Bush up three? It actually came out last night, p ublished in the papers today. CBS/New York Times has Bush up three in th e national horse race. T hey put out a poll today that shows Bush and Kerry tied nationwide 49-49 . The poll actually shows President Bush leading Senator Kerry 49 -47 among likely voters. I thought that's w hat polls were likely voters and registered voters, and likely voters is what you focus on more, and in likely voters the Bush presidency campai gn is up 49-47. So how did USA Today/CNN/Gallup determine the race was a tie? They "distributed" the 3% of voters who say they're undecided. Well, according to the reporter Susan Page, and this is a q uote, "Gallup's formula assumes that nine of ten of the undecided voters would support Kerry based on analyses of previous presidential races in volving an incumbent."
That's why this project would be thrown out of a reasonable, responsible professor's statistics class. You just assume, Gallup's formula assumes nine of ten of the undecided would supp ort Kerry? There is no previous presidential race in a generation or maybe beyond that shows 90% of the undecided voters breaking toward the challenger. One of the reasons they say this is because Bush is not at this precious 50%, and s o if he's not there, that's bad for the incumbent, and the undecideds us ually trend at the last minute to the challenger. If it's true at all it 's in congressional races, but it's not true in presidential races. See , there's a dirty little secret here is that all these polls assume the undecideds are all going to vote. In the morning the unde cideds may get up, and they just may be so fed up, "Screw this."
the internals of today's N ew York Times, you'll find that fiscal undecided voters are leaning towa rd voting for the president. They didn't put this in the news story, but it's in there. If you cl...
|
http://csua.com/feed/