2
   

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

 
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 10:33 am
Nimh the one platoon is a tiny anecdotal instance and, of course, is being blown out of all proportion by a press who wishes to make it look like another monumental disaster in the war.

Whether the opposition 'support' is considered support by the opposition is irrelevent to the troops themselves. To hear a candidate for president say that it is 'the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time' is a cruel slap in the face to them and is essentially declaring them a failure. They resent it, and no amount of spin will change that.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 10:47 am
Fox - you'll get a kick out of this Smile

http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20041011-085231-5401r.htm

(A little perspective)
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 10:54 am
Yeah that's great, JW, and spot on accurate. The lefties will hate it though, especially considering its author. Smile
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 11:13 am
I know...they'll see me as pure evil LOL.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 01:21 pm
Is something afoot ... or is it not?

Every time a poll comes out suggesting we are at the cusp of a significant turn of the numbers towards Bush, another one follows that suggests a continuing deadlock.

One thing is sure: the polls are not showing any move away from Bush.

Newsweek poll, 14-15 October (so after the last debate). Registered voter numbers compared with those of two weeks ago.

Likely voters, 3-way race
Bush 50%
Kerry 44%

Nader 1%

Registered voters, 3-way race
Bush 48% (+3)
Kerry 46% (-1)
Nader 1% (-1)

Likely voters, 2-way race
Bush 50%
Kerry 45%

Registered voters, 2-way race
Bush 48% (+2)
Kerry 47% (-2)

Time poll, Oct. 14-15 (so after the last debate). Numbers compared to those of last week.

Likely voters, 3-way race
Bush 45% (-1)
Kerry 45% (no ch.)
Nader 4% (no ch.)

Likely voters, 2-way race
Bush 46% (-1)
Kerry 46% (no ch.)

Registered voters, 2-way race
Bush 46% (+3)
Kerry 46% (+2)
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 01:25 pm
Well Nimh old buddy, it looks close - but good.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 01:29 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
Nimh the one platoon is a tiny anecdotal instance and, of course, is being blown out of all proportion by a press who wishes to make it look like another monumental disaster in the war.

Whether the opposition 'support' is considered support by the opposition is irrelevent to the troops themselves. To hear a candidate for president say that it is 'the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time' is a cruel slap in the face to them and is essentially declaring them a failure. They resent it, and no amount of spin will change that.



Do you really buy into this shyt...or are you just spouting the party line?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 01:37 pm
This from the write-up of the Newsweek poll (headlined - oddly, considering the sudden Bush lead it uncovers among likely voters - "Too Close to Call"):
Quote:
In a three-way race with Independent candidate Ralph Nader, 48 percent of all voters say they would reelect Bush while 46 percent prefer Kerry.

Removing Nader, who draws just 1 percent of the vote, bumps the Kerry-Edwards ticket up to 47 percent, reducing the incumbent's statistically insignificant lead to one point [..] Before the debates began on Sept. 30, the Republican ticket held a commanding 11-point lead.

Results based on likely voters (as opposed to all registered voters) give Bush the edge, with Bush-Cheney pulling 50 percent of the vote and Kerry-Edwards drawing 44 percent in a three-way race (Nader still gets 1 percent). This suggests that turnout will be critical in determining the outcome of the election: Kerry now leads Bush 57 percent to 36 percent among those who identify themselves as first-time voters. The number of voters who say they are still open to switching candidates is actually fairly small, but still large enough to determine the popular vote winner: One in ten (11 percent) registered voters are still uncommitted.

Very unusual is this bit about men/women:
Quote:
Bush has a clear advantage with women, who prefer him 49 percent to 43 percent. Kerry has a slight edge with men, 50 percent to 46 percent. The Democrat also commands 50 percent of the youth vote (with Bush at 41 percent) and 54 percent of the senior vote (to Bush's 39 percent.) But Bush dominates the 30-49 set (56 percent to 39 percent).

On the debate and on the issues:
Quote:
Among the 64 percent of all registered voters who say they watched at least some of the latest debate, which focused largely on domestic issues, most (44 percent) declare Kerry the winner while 36 percent say Bush outperformed his challenger. Sixteen percent call it a draw (61 percent picked Kerry as the winner of the first debate). Kerry is viewed by debate-watchers as having a better command on the issues (49 to 43 percent), seeming more confident and self-assured (53 to 39 percent) and more likely to understand the concerns of "people like you" (49 to 43 percent). Still, Bush's demeanor on Wednesday led more people to see him as more personally likeable (48 to 43 percent).

[..] based on what they have learned from all debates, a quarter (25 percent) of the country's voters say they have become more inclined to vote for Kerry, compared to 16 percent who say they have been swayed by Bush. But most (56 percent) say the debates have had no difference in choosing who gets their vote.

Terrorism and the war in Iraq still rank highest (26 percent and 20 percent respectively) on the list of issues that will determine who voters choose. On both issues, Bush is the stronger candidate: He is preferred on terrorism 54 to 38 percent and on Iraq 51 to 41 percent. Kerry is stronger on key domestic issues. In order if importance to voters, Kerry is preferred to Bush on the economy (48 to 45 percent), health care and Medicare (50 to 42 percent), and American jobs and foreign competition (49 to 40 percent).

The two are tied at 45 percent on education, which comes next on voters' list of priorities. Bush's record of cutting taxes is preferred to Kerry's tax plan, 49 to 42 percent. Issues less pivotal to voters are the environment (51 to 34 percent in Kerry's favor), gay marriage (41 to 39 percent in Bush's favor), stem-cell research (54 to 32 percent in Kerry's favor) and abortion (44 to 42 percent in Bush's favor). [..]

Meanwhile, the president's approval ratings remain below the halfway mark (47 percent) for the second time since the GOP convention in late August. Nearly half of all voters (48 percent) still say they do not want to see Bush reelected, while 47 percent say they do. And more than half (55 percent) are dissatisfied with "the way things are going in this country" (compared to 40 percent satisfied).
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 01:57 pm
Curiouser and curiouser. I got the above numbers for the Time poll from the ever-reliable Pollingreport.com. But on Time's own website, a press release has different numbers, which are also listed on realclearpolitics.com:

Likely voters
Bush 48% (+2)
Kerry 46% (+1)
Nader 3% (-1)

Press release also got lots of data on the debates etc.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 03:29 pm
Frank writes
Quote:
Do you really buy into this shyt...or are you just spouting the party line?


Frank I am unashamedly pro military and get the vast bulk of information from people who are or have been in Iraq. Unless you have a plethora of friends who say that mutinies are rampant and the troops are about to stage a mass rebellion, I'm going to go with what my friends and family tell me. If the press gave 1/10th as much play on all the heroic accomplishments of our men and women over there, if they give 1/10th as much play to the truly amazing and wonderful gppd that is being done as they do to one minor incident, I think we'd have most of our people coming home already.

It's a free country. You are free to paint things as black as you wish. As is the U.S. media. I think to do so gives great aid and comfort to the terrorists and puts our citizens and our allies at far greater risk and is making it much more difficult to do their job.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 03:34 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
Frank writes
Quote:
Do you really buy into this shyt...or are you just spouting the party line?


Frank I am unashamedly pro military and get the vast bulk of information from people who are or have been in Iraq. Unless you have a plethora of friends who say that mutinies are rampant and the troops are about to stage a mass rebellion, I'm going to go with what my friends and family tell me. If the press gave 1/10th as much play on all the heroic accomplishments of our men and women over there, if they give 1/10th as much play to the truly amazing and wonderful gppd that is being done as they do to one minor incident, I think we'd have most of our people coming home already.

It's a free country. You are free to paint things as black as you wish. As is the U.S. media. I think to do so gives great aid and comfort to the terrorists and puts our citizens and our allies at far greater risk and is making it much more difficult to do their job.


Well...that answers my question.

You do buy into all this shyt.

Thanks for the response.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 04:07 pm
Today's tracking poll results:

Zogby
Bush 48 (no ch.)
Kerry 44 (no ch.)


Rasmussen
Bush 48.3 (-0.7)
Kerry 46.2 (+0.7)


ABC/WaPo

Likely voters
Bush 50 (+2)
Kerry 47 (-1)

Nader 2 (+1)

Registered voters
Bush 48 (+1)
Kerry 47 (-1)
Nader 2 (no ch.)

TIPP

3-way
Bush 48 (+1)
Kerry 45 (+1)

Nader 2 (no ch.)

2-way
Bush 47 (no ch.)
Kerry 44 (+1)
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 04:12 pm
nimh, in that the MOE typically is somewhere between 3 to 4 points at the 95% Confidence Level, any lead equal to or less than the MOE can be considered "Too close to call".
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 04:20 pm
timberlandko wrote:
nimh, in that the MOE typically is somewhere between 3 to 4 points at the 95% Confidence Level, any lead equal to or less than the MOE can be considered "Too close to call".

True. Formally speaking, any lead that is within twice the MoE is "too close to call", since the MoE applies to both candidates' numbers.

Still - I dont wanna sound like Fox here, but that Newsweek article really goes out of its way to make things sound better for us than the dry poll numbers in themselves would suggest. Opening the story at length with the RV numbers (and how much better for Kerry they are than those of a few weeks ago) and only then coming up with the LV numbers (which are much more favourable to Bush), and all.

Stuff like that doesn't make me feel comfortable - just like seeing the folks at TNR getting all ahead of themselves lately, calling the race "Kerry's to lose", makes me kinda anxious. I hope they won't let their drive get them carried away - we need down-to-earth estimations, now.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 08:27 pm
Going down ...

Iowa Electronic Markets data

nimh wrote:
13/10 average:
Bush 53.9 Kerry 46.6
13/10 last:
Bush 54.0 Kerry 46.2
14/10 average:
Bush 54.3 Kerry 46.1
14/10 last:
Bush 54.9 Kerry 45.0

15/10 average:
Bush 58.1 Kerry 42.7
15/10 last:
Bush 58.0 Kerry 42.2
16/10 average:
Bush 59.0 Kerry 41.7
16/10 current:
Bush 58.7 Kerry 41.2
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Oct, 2004 09:29 pm
Same story in the Casinos.

OCCOM BILL wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
Bush is out...Kerry will be our next president. And you can go to the bank with that.

All the rest of this stuff is bullshyt.
Hey Frank; did you get any of that action when B.O.S. had a Kerry victory paying over 2 to 1 a couple weeks ago?

He's still +120 as opposed to Bush's -160 putting his odds at 7 to 5.

Btw, I know you know as well as I know how well these guys know what they know, ya know? Idea
This was 3 days ago. Today the numbers are:
Bush -200 (means you have to wager $200 to $100 back)
Kerry+150 (means if you wager $100 you'll get back $150)

What do you think Frank,... bullshyt? Razz
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Oct, 2004 03:18 am
OCCOM BILL wrote:
Same story in the Casinos.

OCCOM BILL wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
Bush is out...Kerry will be our next president. And you can go to the bank with that.

All the rest of this stuff is bullshyt.
Hey Frank; did you get any of that action when B.O.S. had a Kerry victory paying over 2 to 1 a couple weeks ago?

He's still +120 as opposed to Bush's -160 putting his odds at 7 to 5.

Btw, I know you know as well as I know how well these guys know what they know, ya know? Idea
This was 3 days ago. Today the numbers are:
Bush -200 (means you have to wager $200 to $100 back)
Kerry+150 (means if you wager $100 you'll get back $150)

What do you think Frank,... bullshyt? Razz


I think that Kerry will be elected president in November.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Oct, 2004 03:38 am
Today's endorsement of John Kerry by the New York Times is a gem.

Hope you can get through using this link...

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/opinion/17sun1.html?th
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Oct, 2004 06:26 am
Yeah, it looks like suddenly everyone's decided that it's over, after all - the debates a mere temporary distraction, and now that they're over, where were we again? Oh yeah, Bush was winning. Of course, this might have something to do with it:

http://www.pollingreport.com/images/0410GEN.GIF

It looks tied/tight at first sight, but on a closer look it's striking how not one of these polls has Bush below 48%. His numbers are remarkably equal in each and every poll, whereas Kerry's numbers are much more flexible, with 48-49% merely the top end of a spectrum that reaches as far down as 43%.

Some of you might enjoy some schadenfreude to learn that I'm aghast, honestly. I did think Bush was still going to win this race and that it wouldn't be all that close either, but this immediate post-debate recovery I did not expect.

I mean, as soon as the debates began, Kerry started winning, edging the President's numbers down with every debate and post-debate spin. This third debate was no different from the previous two - in fact, the polls say he was seen to have won it with a clearer margin than the previous one. Yet suddenly this backlash. Is it really all about Mary Cheney - could that really be the one thing they picked up on in the end? Yeah, yeah, it shows that "Kerry will do anything to get elected", but considering the alternative is Bush/Rove (as unscrupulous an electioneering team as seen since Kennedy), that putdown seems a bit irrelevant. It's weird.

(Now the usual suspects will turn up to say that the voters have simply realised after all that Bush is just a good guy who always did his best and actually made no major mistakes and that Kerry is simply all talk, a flip-flopping liberal who can't be trusted. But somehow, I'm not buying into the notion that something undefinable has suddenly turned the undecided voters collectively into Foxfyre or JustWonders ...)
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Oct, 2004 08:14 am
(tack on IMOs wherever appropriate :wink:)
Mary Cheney definitely had an impact... the footage of his response they showed on Headline News was particularly telling. His body language was as if someone had told him "an unconfirmed story has you jogging in your underwear this morning"... Equal parts amusement, indifference and arrogance and all behind that overused, phony smile and before his too obviously canned response 'they're just getting desperate'. Scratch arrogance and use overconfidence..., which was a terrible thing to show to folks who, some of which at least, are only willing to accept him out of their abhorrence of the other guy. Others were likely turned off by his utter lack of concern for the Cheney's feelings a second time. Bill Maher predictably made several off color jokes about it, which only served to keep it festering and I'm sure other comedians did as well. Plus, I'm sure this isn't the only place it was discussed at length. :wink:

Meanwhile Bush, dopey and agonizingly repetitive as he is, just keeps pounding home the flip-flop-fiesta theme that, like it or not, really does reflect Kerry's record. Voted against Gulf War 1 is in such contrast to his current aggressive talk, and it was delivered perfectly, adding an exclamation point to the "87 billion..." fiasco and myriad of other examples of.

Another thing I noticed that may have been a critical tactical error on Kerry's part, is in his insistence that Bush doesn't admit he was wrong about Iraq being a threat... He never does either. Instead of that long double-speak explanation (that no one but the choir buys) about his vote, he should have just said, "What can I say? I was wrong too. When an intelligent man makes a mistake, the best thing he can do next is to first admit it... (pause for affect) and then take steps to correct it" (last part while pounding the podium and finish with by silently nodding his head in the affirmative. Picture Clinton doing "John Kerry said send me".) Bush would have doubled over. Laughing

Part of Kerry's problem is he's been so quick with his excuses, and his plethora of contradictions have required so many, that he has practically no wiggle room left without contradicting previous statements. Then consider the gazillion dollar war chest Bush uses to highlight these follies. Conversely, Bush has tons of wiggle room because he doesn't often bother making excuses… and his tune is maddeningly repetitive. Apparently, he recognizes his limitations and generally stays within them.

What's it come down to? Which man does the general public believe? George Bush believes what he says, even when he's wrong, and it doesn't take an intellect greater than his own to figure out what he'll do with another 4 years. Pretty cut and dry.

John Kerry, proved infinitely more human and likeable without the gazillion dollar spin filter… but ultimately we still have no clue what he'd do in the next 4 years. The only discernable pattern you can see in his history is in direct contrast to his campaign rhetoric. I suspect this, on top of the phony smile, Massachusetts accent, unlikable wife and the usual mountain of slander is why he's losing ground as judgment day approaches. Wrong guy…

Personally, I still think the General was the way to go. I think Bob Dole was right about Senatorial experience. It provides such an abundance of history that it can be shaped any which way you wish with selective gathering. With the size of today's campaign war chests; inexperience or at least limited experience, may have become a prerequisite for the job of President. Shocked
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Oz fest 2004 - Question by Love2is0evol
Human Events Names Man of the Year, 2004 - Discussion by gungasnake
Your 2004 mix tape - Discussion by boomerang
BUSH WON FAIR AND SQUARE... - Discussion by Frank Apisa
Weeping and gnashing of teeth - Discussion by FreeDuck
WOW! Why Andrew Sullivan is supporting John Kerry - Discussion by BumbleBeeBoogie
Margarate Hassan - hostage in Iraq - Discussion by msolga
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 09/24/2024 at 12:34:59