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

Info junkies might wanna take a look at Dave Liep's Political Atlas and at PoliticalForecasting.Com ... both are non-partisan (unlike pro-Dem ElectoralVote.Com or pro-GOP NationalReview.Com, for instance), have lots of good info, and tons of links to other info of varying political substance.

0 Replies

for folks that care about america more than special interests, it's gonna be a kerry vote, imho...

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

This one shoulda gone here:

Who won the debate?

Update:

nimh wrote:

ABC News - on a sample that included 38% Republicans and only 30% Democrats / 28% Independents:
Kerry 42%
Bush 41%

See Timber's post above for interesting details:
- Kerry "won" despite the sample including more Republicans than Democrats (though it must be added that the Independents leaned towards Kerry in greater numbers than towards Bush even before the debate).
- 81% of Democrats thought Kerry won while only 73% of Republicans thought Bush won, with Independents thinking Kerry won by 42% to 35%.
- There was no immediate effect on voter preferences (as there rarely is, any movement in the polls tends to come afterwards)

nimh wrote:

CBS News Poll
Kerry 39%
Bush 25%

This was a poll of uncommitted voters

nimh wrote:

Gallup/CNN - on a sample that included 41% Democrats and only 35% Republicans / 24% Independents
Kerry 52%
Bush 39%

I had the sample info wrong (That's what you get if you take your data from blog comments). According to the Gallup site, the sample was made up of 36% Democrats, 36% Republicans and 28% Independents.

The results are impressive especially in comparison. The same poll had Kerry winning the second debate by only 47% to 45% - and had him winning the first debate by 53% to 37%. So the Gallup poll has Kerry winning this latest one by almost as much as he won the first debate.

nimh wrote:

CNN Focus Group, 17 on the panel
Kerry 10
Bush 7

Addition:

Democracy Corps post-debate poll (Democratic pollster) says that Kerry won the debate slightly:
Kerry 41%
Bush 36%
Another 11% said "both" and 13% said "neither".

The survey also credits Kerry with a 2-point bounce in his overall poll numbers (47% to 49%). Bush stayed unchanged at 46%. 30% of respondents leaned Republican, 29% lean Democrat.

More info from the CNN/USA Today/Gallup survey:

- 73% of Republicans thought Bush won; 86% of Democrats thought Kerry won. Independents thought Kerry won 54% to 34%.

- "The poll also shows that 42% of viewers said they felt more favorable toward Kerry as a result of the debate, while just 15% felt less favorable. By comparison, 27% of viewers felt more favorable toward Bush, and 17% felt less favorable."

- Kerry "beat the president by more than 10 percentage points on caring "about the needs of people like you" (53% to 41%) and having "a good understanding of the issues" (49% to 37%). [..] Kerry also had a 7-point advantage on Bush on which candidate "agreed with you more on the issues you care about" (53% to 46%)." On "showing he shared your values", Kerry won by a narrow 4 points. Kerry was deemed slightly more believable (by a 3% margin), but less likable (by a 5% margin)

- 55% of viewers said afterwards that Kerry could handle healthcare better, 41% Bush. "Kerry edged Bush on the economy by five points (51% Kerry, 46% Bush), the candidates essentially tied on education (Kerry 48%, Bush 47%), and Bush had a 3-point advantage on taxes (50% Bush, 47% Kerry)."

0 Replies

I watched and again scored the debate as a debate judge would score it. I again gave Kerry the edge for style and form though Bush did much better in this debate than in the first one. On substance it was a draw. Kerry won overall because he didn't miss any opportunities for rebuttal and Bush missed several. This is mostly because Kerry was slinging his memorized facts out there in such quanities there is no way anybody other than a Mensa candidate could remember them all to formulate an extemporaneous rebuttal.

One example: Kerry gigged Bush for failing to extend federal unemployment insurance. Bush could have responded that this passed the House and failed by one vote in the Senate. If Kerry had been there to vote, it would have passed and Bush would have signed it. Things like this drive a debate coach crazy--I was screaming at the screen.

I guess I am not surprised at the CBS and ABC poll numbers, both who have been documented trying to 'get' Bush in the last month. I am surprised at some of the other numbers as I scored it much closer. Kerry did win on points, but I had the margin much closer.

0 Replies

Oh well, in that case, it must be closer since you are a debate judge and all.

0 Replies

No, I'm not a debate judge anymore and haven't been since the early 1980's. But I still remember how to score one. Smile

0 Replies

Rasmussen Oct 14: Bush 48, Kerry 46 Bush has a 2.2 point lead in this sample, up .5 from yesterday, while Kerry is off .3, for a net Bush hain of an almost significant .8 - will it hold? Yesterday's Bush lead was 1.4 points. Hafta wait for tomorrow to see if Rasmussen's results really say anything about the debate, as very few phone calls could have been made last night following the debate, and those only in the Western time zones.

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

More info from the CNN/USA Today/Gallup survey:

Came across more details still when I was reading some USAToday stuff. One element I thought was particularly hopeful. Never mind that the polls show him winning this debate, or even all debates (or two wins and a tie) - the questions here show a cumulative success.

For example, on the question who "agreed with you more on the issues you care about", Kerry scored pretty fairly in the poll after the first debate, 46% to 49% for Bush. Margin -3. By the time the second debate was done, 49% said Kerry and 50% said Bush: margin -1. After this debate, 53% said Kerry and 46% Bush: margin +7.

A spike in appreciation is nice if you played a good game. But if in debate after debate you manage to gradually shift the underlying impression a notch every time, that's better. Second example: who "had a good understanding of the issues"? After the first debate, 41% said Kerry; 41% said Bush. Margin: 0. After the second debate, 47% said Kerry; 42% said Bush. Margin: +5. After the third, final debate, 49% said Kerry; 37% said Bush. Margin: +12.

Third example: who "was more believable"? After the first debate, 45% said Kerry; 50% Bush. Margin: -5. After the second debate, 45% said Kerry, 49% said Bush. Margin: -4. Now, 48% says Kerry; 45% Bush. Margin: +3.

Fourth example: the economy. Who "would better handle" it? Before the second debate, 44% said Kerry, 50% said Bush. Margin: -6. Kerry scored nicely in the second debate on that one apparently, drawing even in one night: afterwards 49% said Kerry, just as many Bush. Margin: 0. By the time this debate started, Kerry had gained a lead: 51% to 45%. Margin: +6. He kept that lead in the debate; afterwards 51% still said Kerry, 46% Bush - margin: +5.

There's only two questions with comparative numbers that don't show a cumulative build-up. On the question who was "more likable", the number went up and down: Bush had a lead of 7, 2 and 5 points respectively after the three debates. Kerry's lead on who "expressed himself more clearly" went up and down in similar vein: it was 28, 17 and 32 points respectively.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

This is mostly because Kerry was slinging his memorized facts out there in such quanities there is no way anybody other than a Mensa candidate could remember them all to formulate an extemporaneous rebuttal.

"slinging his memorized facts " ??? you make it sound like knowing what's happening is a bad thing. it's a president's JOB to have the info at hand. he's the boss. the big cheese. le grand fromage. for crying out loud, bush just doesn't pay attention to anything and doesn't read. by his own admission...

Foxfyre wrote:

One example: Kerry gigged Bush for failing to extend federal unemployment insurance. Bush could have responded that this passed the House and failed by one vote in the Senate. If Kerry had been there to vote, it would have passed and Bush would have signed it.

by 1 vote huh? so what your're saying is that it fell mostly along party lines. and republicans declined to do what was right by the american people. i haven't looked it up, but are you sure that kerry missed that vote? if so, please give me the bill number so i can look it up and see how guys voted on it...

Foxfyre wrote:

I guess I am not surprised at the CBS and ABC poll numbers, both who have been documented trying to 'get' Bush in the last month.

oh?? so does that mean that you condemn fox for giving a big launch to o'neill and his swiftboat veterans for bitterness? and sinclair broadcasting for their rabidly partisan pontificating??

0 Replies

What Fox did or didn't do has zero to do with what the other network hae done. Don't you guys ever get tired of not being able to defend your side but can only attack the other side?

Evenso, you'd have a hard time convincing me Fox gave O'neill a boost any more than any other network. O'Reilly wouldn't touch the Swiftboat vets.

0 Replies

O'Reily was too busy touching other things apparently. Shocked

0 Replies

LOL. I read the free porn that was in that woman's complaint and the one thing I can't figure out: How in the hell can you force anybody to have phone sex? Speaker phone got stuck in the on position? Gun to the head which sorta removes the need for phone sex. I just don't understand it.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

What Fox did or didn't do has zero to do with what the other network hae done.

hey, you are the one sqwonking about abc and cbs. and as i remember, it's the republi-cons that are always up on the roof shrilling about the "liberal media". it's too funny. a one network declaration that every single one of the other outlets are the "elite media".

Foxfyre wrote:

Evenso, you'd have a hard time convincing me Fox gave O'neill a boost any more than any other network. O'Reilly wouldn't touch the Swiftboat vets.

then i must watch fox a hell of a lot more than you do. o'reilly is the one variable voice on that entire network.

not to mention, it would hard for o'reilly to get near the swift boy. seeing as how hannity had him surgically attached to his hip.

get real, hannity had "o' kneel" on h&c weeks before the book even released.

Foxfyre wrote:

Don't you guys ever get tired of not being able to defend your side but can only attack the other side?

how disingenuous. "liberal". "flip flopper". "faked his wounds". no, i hear much more dirty screed coming from the official bush organizations than from the kerry camp.

you want to know what i/we get tired of? the uber-patriotic shrieking coming from the far right.

over 1/2 the country is down on what the bush administration has done, and failed to do. he's at a very charitible 47% approval.

but the right wing spin? "they are out of the mainstream".

bull$hit. we are the mainstream. every bit as much as conservatives. and much more so than the born again yahoos that have got bushy on the leash.

0 Replies

There is a forged document and witnesses to testify that Dan Rather and CBS went with it despite that no witness could authenticate it. That was premeditated and malicious and Rather got caught on it.

There is a document that ABC ordered their people to not treat Kerry and Bush equitably and gave the nod to favor Kerry. That is premeditated and highly unethical.

Okay, your turn. What has Fox done that is unethical re the Swiftboats or anything else? Forged documents? Editorials proved to be false? A memo? Anything?

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

O'Reily was too busy touching other things apparently.

lol! good one mcg!

o'reilly? jeez, never expected that one.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

There is a forged document and witnesses to testify that Dan Rather and CBS went with it despite that no witness could authenticate it. That was premeditated and malicious and Rather got caught on it.

have you ever seen anything from me defending rather after the facts came out? no, you haven't. he screwed up.

Foxfyre wrote:

There is a document that ABC ordered their people to not treat Kerry and Bush equitably and gave the nod to favor Kerry. That is premeditated and highly unethical.

watch the doc, "oufoxed".

Foxfyre wrote:

Okay, your turn. What has Fox done that is unethical re the Swiftboats or anything else?

you don't think that it's unethical to present republican talking points day after day as "fact". and then declare yourself "fair and balanced".

no? then what's your problem with abc doing the same thing?

you don't see any problem with the way that hannity is so openly warm and fuzzy with his fellow conservatives, but is openly hostile with the others?

Foxfyre wrote:

A memo? Anything?

above. several memos were discussed in outfoxed. all pointed to making the bush administration look good.

i don't like that sort of thing from either pov. but it's not honest for you to lamb baste the alphabets for doing something and then defend fox's efforts to do the same thing.

frankly, my biggest problem with fox is sean hannity. but he's the rock star of that network, hence he would be the face that network would seem to want projected.

0 Replies

Hidden in a long article about all kinds of election stuff ... some (for me) surprising stuff. I'd given up on Florida already, but behind in Iowa and West-Virginia, that sucks.

Quote:

Kerry and Bush strategists largely agree on the battlefield, and who is winning in each state -- save Ohio. While the Bush campaign says it is winning Ohio, Kerry's internal polling shows the president losing by about five points and fading, according to two aides. Kerry will campaign in Ohio this weekend and many more times before election day.

The Kerry campaign is confident that it is winning Pennsylvania and Michigan by comfortable margins and pulling slightly ahead in Florida, a must-win state for Bush. The Kerry campaign's polling shows Bush leading in Iowa and West Virginia, and running about even in Wisconsin.

Kerry, however, has largely failed to erode the president's strong support among rural voters, especially in the upper Midwest, and among the devoutly religious, according to Greenberg. Democrats credit Bush's support among the religious and rural for small, but significant, leads in Iowa, which Gore won in 2000, and West Virginia, as well as stronger-than-expected numbers in Wisconsin and Minnesota.

0 Replies

DTOM, I think the 'evidence' in OUTFOXED was weak and nebulous at best. I personally think Fox is tilted right but they at least do balance everything with a credible spokesperson from the left. Hannity is balanced by Colmes--I used to listen to the latter on the radio and there is nobody more rabidly liberal than he is. He was better on the radio than he is on TV in my opinion.

When Fox has screwed up--the inadvertent memo on their website for instance--I have protested them too. To their credit, they did own up to it on their own, took it down immediately, and posted a retraction that it was a misplaced prank and was not the position of Fox News. When in the opinion of their analysis gurus Kerry has bettered Bush, they have openly said so. I have not heard anything nearly so balanced from any other network except weakly from CNN.
But enough of that.

NIMH, after watching all this stuff so closely for all these weeks, do you think the pols are right that the debates won't matter two weeks from now and, apart from some major gaff or revelation of one or both candidates, the election will be decided on the economyand Iraq as it appears on November 2?

0 Replies

Interesting, nimh ... thanks for that.

Oh, and as long as nimh and I have an interuption goin' on, excuse me, fellas ... I know you're havin' fun and all, but I wanna drop a little polling info in here too, if ya don't mind.

TIPP Oct 14: Bush 47, Kerry 44 The 3-point 47-44 spread has been constant over the past 3 days of TIPPS' new tracking poll. The previous weekly numbers were Sept 28 45/45 Tie, Sept 20 45/42 for Bush, Sept 13 46/46 Tie

Incidentally, Bush has an unsurprising 55 Point Military vote lead, according to a survey released earlier this week (Oct 11) by The Military Times. (Marine Corps edition HERE, subscription required to access some features )

http://www.able2know.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10156/Mil%20Vote.jpg

OK ... I'm done for now. Go back to whatever it was you were doin'. Mr. Green

0 Replies

Doesn't look like the military is all that anti-Bush huh?

0 Replies

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

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know