If you were a bookie... Polls and bets on the 2004 elections

Blatham,

I agree that all of Bush's political advisore, Rove included, are likely delighted by the activities of the VVFT. That , however doesn't mean that they created them.
I didn't say 'created'. Financed and supported with personel and promotion? Yes, and the links are there to see unless you just are too naive for words. Campaigns commonly use third party agents, particularly to do dirty work. Rove was a student of Atwater and learned dirty way better than you know (only because you haven't taken the time to study it). But at least you can go to the trouble of recalling DiIulio's experience. I think you know him? the Christian Republican Bush appointed to set up the faith-based initiatives, who later went on to recount passing Rove's office and hearing Rove yelling "We'll f*ck him like he's never been f*cked before." That's minor. The guy is completely unprincipled except as regards winning. He's very good, and a classic sleeze who lies through his teeth.

Indeed the prominent evidence strongly suggests otherwise. O'Neill, Hoffman, Gallanti, Stockdale and others were speaking out and even organizing long before Kerry emerged as the Democrat nominee in the current election. Further their motives sprang from personal issues, independent of this campaign.

Even if Rove had played a prominent part in organizing their activities (and I don't know of any evidence of that.)
Of course you don't. He's going to sign an affidavidt and send it on to the Times?
it would not have in any way diminished the light it has cast on the character of Senator John Kerry.
You've bought the story regardless of the contradictions, the false statements, and the dirty fingerprints of Rove all over this thing. That's what they wanted. Congrats, you are now an effect, rather than a cause.

Do you suppose that any of Kerry's functionaries were involved in the furor over Bush's missing drill records from the Alabama National Guard? They certainly had the same potential motivation which you ascribe to Rove. Apparently in your book that proves their guilt.

Of course democrat agents, employed by and loyal to the Kerry campaign, scoured for bad stuff on Bush. Of course they pointed to his very likely absence. But that isn't forwarding lies. It isn't using the old wounds and divisiveness of Viet Nam to denigrate someone who actually didn't escape service. I can't believe your constant talk of character when Bush and Cheney have the records, compared to Kerry or anyone who served, that they have. It is so so counter-intuitive george. The only strategy Rove could possibly set out on was to denigrate Kerry's service and record, so that his boys wouldn't look like what they really are. And again, Rove and Bush out to divide your country for political gain. Of all the false statements that have tumbled crookedly out of Bush's mouth, the "I'm a uniter, not a divider" is, for me, the most despicable. These guys are NOT interested in healing old wounds, george. They are interested only in winning, and screw all else.

Differences Between Polls

September 6, 2004--We have been flooded with e-mails asking (in varying tones of politeness) why our poll results seem different from those released by Time and Newsweek.

There are two basic explanations, one involving our polling data and one involving the newsmagazines. For those who need to know the answer before the explanation, the bottom line is that the President is ahead by 4 to 5 points at this time. That's a significant improvement over the past few weeks, but not a double digit lead.

Our current poll (showing the President ahead by just over a point) includes a Saturday sample that is way out of synch with all the days before it and with the Sunday data that followed. In fact, Saturday's one-day sample showed a big day for Kerry while all the days surrounding it showed a decent lead for the President.

It seems likely that Saturday reflects a rogue sample (especially since it was over a holiday weekend). But, it remains in our 3-day rolling average for one more day (Tuesday's report). If we drop the Saturday sample from our data, Bush is currently ahead by about 4 percentage points in the Rasmussen Reports Tracking Poll.

That's still a smaller lead than shown by Time and Newsweek. Those polls appear to have the mirror image problem of a Los Angeles Times poll in June reportedly showing Kerry with a huge lead. That LA Times survey included too many Democrats in their sample. Today, it seems likely that Time and Newsweek included too many Republicans.

Time reports that Republicans will vote for Bush by an 89% to 9% margin; Democrats for Kerry by an 80% to 9% margin; and, unaffiliated voters for Bush 43% to 39%.

Four years ago, 35% of voters were Republicans, 39% were Democrats, and the rest were unaffiliated. If you apply those percentages to the Time internals, you find Bush up by about 3 percentage points. If you do the same with the Newsweek internal numbers, you find Bush with a six point lead. Those results are very close to the Rasmussen Reports data (excluding the Saturday sample).

All of this leads me to conclude that the President is currently ahead by 4 or 5 percentage points.

For those who say turnout might be different this time, I agree. It might be different. One of our great challenges between now and Election Day is to figure out how much (if at all) the turnout will change from historic norms. Partisans from both sides seem convinced that there are special circumstance that will increase turnout for their team. Others speculate that their may be a smaller number of unaffiliated voters since events of the past four years have caused people to take sides.

Whatever the turnout differences may be, they will not be big enough to match the implications of the Time and Newsweek polls.

As always, it's useful to use common sense when reviewing poll data. If a poll suggests that 10 or 20 percent of Americans are changing their mind on a regular basis, it should be viewed with caution. Most of the time, you will find that the partisan mix of the polling sample is changing more than the actual perceptions of voters.

Yesterday, we released a brief assessment of the Bush Bounce. Based upon our 7-day Tracking data (less susceptible to one-day rogue samples), it appears that the President has gained more than five points over a three week period of time. Given the Swift Boat issue and the Republican National Convention, that seems to be a reasonable measure of the shift. [..]

Analysis of swing states gives challenger small lead

Forecasts of John Kerry's political demise may have been exaggerated in recent days, and he could still be clinging to a narrow lead in the US presidential race, according to a poll published yesterday.

The poll, by Zogby International, reflected the state of play in 20 swing states, and found that the surge in George Bush's support there after last week's Republican convention, was less pronounced than the double-digits suggested in two weekend polls.

Those surveys, in Time and Newsweek, triggered alarm and finger-pointing in the Democratic camp, and a reshuffle in the Kerry team. But other surveys have since suggested the Bush convention "bounce" was much smaller and the contest remains a close one.

The Zogby poll says the president has made up ground in many of the 20 battleground states, but Mr Kerry retains a slim lead in most of them - enough to give him a majority in the electoral college, if the vote was held now.

The college, which chooses the president, is made up of 538 delegates drawn from the 50 states and Washington DC, according to population. Assigning electors according to the way each state is leaning now, the Zogby poll gives Mr Kerry a lead of 273 to 222, down from the past two months, but a significant edge all the same.

"There's no doubt that Bush got a bounce ... but no way is he up 11 points," John Zogby, the head of Zogby International, said yesterday.

Newsweek showed the Mr Bush with an 11 percentage point lead among registered voters, while Time gave him a nine-point lead. But another survey by Gallup, CNN and USA Today showed only a one-point advantage.

The confusion may reflect the volatility that follows the impassioned speeches and allegations made at conventions. It may also be explained by different surveying methods, and some of it is simply a result of polls being taken over the Labour Day holiday weekend, when many Americans are away from home.

Charlie Cook, an experienced US election analyst, said: "To be dependent upon getting a representative sample over a holiday weekend is enough to make any pollster wince. Polling conducted this week, after people are back from Labour Day and had a chance to digest the Republican convention, will be a far better test."

US electoral history suggests that leads established at party conventions can often dissipate in the last two frenetic months of the campaign. Al Gore had a double-digit lead over Mr Bush after the Labour day weekend in 2000, but lost it after lacklustre performances in the three presidential debates.

Mr Bush, who had not previously shown much aptitude for public speaking, surprised many doubters by avoiding serious mistakes and scoring a few points in the debates. Mr Kerry must hope to do better than his Democratic predecessor in knocking his opponent off balance.

The Zogby results suggest the president's emphasis on his role as a wartime leader at the New York convention helped him reassert control in traditionally conservative southern states where Mr Kerry had been making headway before August, such as North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia. But elsewhere the Democratic contender is holding on, and in some states - Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico and Washington - has even strengthened his position since the attacks made on his fitness to be America's commander-in-chief.

Matthew Dowd and Doug Sosnik, top strategists in the Bush and Kerry camps respectively, both predict that as the race nears the November 2 finishing line, money and manpower will increasingly focus on three large swing states, Florida, Pennsylvania and Ohio, which have a combined total of 68 electoral college votes.

Both candidates have been spending more and more time campaigning there. Mr Bush is due to inspect storm damage in Florida today before heading to Pennsylvania. Mr Kerry will be in Cincinnati, Ohio.

Both Mr Dowd and Mr Sosnik forecast that whoever wins two of the three big battlegrounds will probably be the next president.

At present, according to Zogby, Mr Bush is ahead in Ohio by 11 points. Mr Kerry has a smaller edge of three points in Pennsylvania. Florida is a dead heat, as it has been for much of the year. By that reckoning, this election could be fought and won once more in the Sunshine State, currently being pummelled by hurricanes, just as it was four years ago.

The polls goes on:

Kerry is back in the race, says latest poll

Run the Numbers: A Stronger Showing for Bush

SEPTEMBER 7, 2004

Coming out of the Republican convention, President Bush has his best showing since John Kerry accepted his party's nomination in late July.

The latest Zogby Interactive poll still shows Mr. Kerry well ahead, leading in 12 of the 16 battlegrounds in Zogby's twice-a-month polls. But Mr. Bush took the lead in two states -- Arkansas and Tennessee -- since the poll conducted a week before his convention. And there are other signs of strength for the president.

Here's how the numbers could play out on Election Day.

To analyze Zogby's results, we start by assuming that the District of Columbia and the 34 states that aren't in the battlegrounds poll will vote for the same political party that they did in the 2000 election. Thus, President Bush begins our calculations with 189 electoral votes and Mr. Kerry with 172. A candidate needs 270 electoral votes to win the White House.

Then, we add in the electoral votes from the latest poll, regardless of the margin of error or the spread between the candidates. Mr. Kerry's 12 states control a total of 135 votes, while Mr. Bush's four have 42. If you add up the numbers, you find that Mr. Kerry would win the Electoral College 307-231.

Sifting through the numbers, though, the results aren't as clear cut.

First, Mr. Kerry's leads in three states -- Florida, Missouri and Nevada -- are less than one percentage point.

Overall, looking only at the states where the results are outside of the margin of error, Mr. Kerry is ahead by just four states to three -- and his Electoral College lead shrinks to 40-36. In fact, more states' results are outside of the margin of error in this poll than in any since Zogby began conducting polls for WSJ.com in late May.

Another sign of shift: In the July 12 poll, which was the leader until now in terms of the poll with the greatest number of states outside of the margin of error, Mr. Kerry had six states (worth 80 votes) outside the margin. At that point, Mr. Bush had none.

Many states show improvement for the president. For instance, Mr. Bush increased his lead in Ohio, a key contest, to 10.9 percentage points, his biggest lead there yet and up sharply from the 5.6-point edge he had in mid-August.

At the same time, Mr. Kerry's lead in Pennsylvania slipped to its weakest since the Zogby polls began in May. Mr. Kerry was ahead there by 2.8 percentage points, inside the margin of error. In four of the five prior polls, Mr. Kerry's lead was outside of the margin; his lead hadn't fallen below 6.5 points in any of the prior Zogby polls.

All told, Mr. Bush's numbers improved in 12 of the 16 states, most notably Tennessee. That state, which has been volatile in prior polls, gave the president a 9.6-point lead. In the mid-August poll, Mr. Kerry was up 1.9 points.
Still, Mr. Kerry picked up ground in Minnesota, Washington, Michigan and New Mexico. His leads in the latter two states moved outside of the margin of error. In Washington, his lead has been outside of the margin in every poll since early June.

And, of course, even with his convention-time gains, the president is still short of the strongest results he got in earlier Zogby polls. At one point in June, Mr. Kerry was ahead just nine states to seven -- and Mr. Bush led the Electoral College analysis, 285-253.

Democrats Ad Buy: Which States?

Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports it is down to fourteen states.

"Sen. John Kerry and the Democratic Party are limiting television advertising to just 14 states as the fall campaign opens, curbing their ambitions for a broader playing field against President Bush. The shift reduces Missouri, Colorado, Arizona and four Southern states to second-tier status.

The Republican incumbent is likely to follow suit, perhaps by pulling money out of those same seven GOP-leaning states and shifting it to traditionally Democratic battlegrounds."

Obviously, this is good news for the President as it reduces the number of Bush 2000 states being actively contested.

The states dropped for now Kerry and the Democrats, but with ad time reserved for later if need be, are Missouri, Colorado, Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, and North Carolina. Virginia does not even have time reserved for later.

Kerry & DNC States With Advertising

2000 Bush States
Florida (27)
Ohio (20)
West Virginia (5)
New Hampshire (4)
Nevada (5)
61 electoral votes

2000 Gore States
Iowa (7)
New Mexico (5)
Pennsylvania (21)
Wisconsin (10)
Michigan (17)
Oregon (7)
Maine (4)
Washington (11)
Minnesota (10)
92 electoral votes

Addendum: BlackRazor ads:

"So, based on these ad-buys, unless the fundamentals of the race change between now and Election Day, there are three paths to victory for Kerry. Hold the Gore states, and:

Win Florida, or;
Win Ohio, or;
Win WV and NV

That's what it's come down to."