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

What's going on?

For one thing, the charge that Kerry is too liberal, which Bush emphasized mostly in the third and last debate on Wednesday night, seems to be sticking. Nearly half say Kerry's political views are too liberal. (Four in ten say Bush is too conservative.) But didn't Kerry win the debate? Yes, as with the first two debates, the public thinks Kerry did the better job on Wednesday night. But as Al Gore learned in 2000, winning a debate on points does not necessarily translate into votes or make a candidate more popular. As in 2000, Bush's favorable ratings -- Americans view of him as a person -- went up after a debate that he lost. Kerry's favorable rating has remained flat. Republicans seem more enthusiastic about the election, and thus more likely to vote, as reflected in the Gallup likely voter model.

Bush may have energized his base in the final debate at the expense of not appealing to a wider audience -- but he managed to do so in a way that made him more popular than Kerry.

Interesting <smallish> turn of events.

Wagering unlikeability via Mary Cheney has come to roost.

Remarks like that reveal (dread word, I know) character...

Bad final note to wade into Election Day. Watch for slippery last minute smear of Bush....which may cement Kerry's fate.

<What is Carville devising right now?....>

"Senator Kerry could have made his point about gay and lesbian Americans without mentioning the Vice-President's daughter.

However, this shouldn't distract us from the fact that President Bush, Karl Rove and other Republicans have been using gay and lesbian families as a political wedge issue in this campaign.

Log Cabin Republicans have a message for both campaigns. For Senator Kerry and Senator Edwards, you do not need to talk about the Vice President's daughter in order to discuss your positions on gay and lesbian issues. For President Bush and Karl Rove, you have a moral obligation to stop using gay and lesbian families as a political wedge issue. Our country and our party deserve better"

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 )




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

Democrats are more likely to: do volunteer work, gamble in casinos or go to art museums or live theater. Democrats [..] are more likely to drink bottled water and Pepsi over Coke and equally likely as Republicans to drink wine. Democrats are more likely to be interested in the NBA. [..] Republicans are more likely [..] to: play golf or go bowling, running or bicycling. They are more likely to go to an antiques or arts show [and] more likely to shop at Walmart. They are more likely to drink specialty coffee and drink Coke over Pepsi. They are more likely to drive, not carpool, and are more likely to own three or more vehicles. They are more likely to own pets, especially cats [..]

I posted this link on another thread and received a response that it was totally useless by someone who was very convincing. I'm curious if you guys agree. Please click here. Thanks!

Interesting <smallish> turn of events.

Wagering unlikeability via Mary Cheney has come to roost.

Remarks like that reveal (dread word, I know) character...

Bad final note to wade into Election Day. Watch for slippery last minute smear of Bush....which may cement Kerry's fate.

<What is Carville devising right now?....>

... he makes some pretty convincing-sounding arguments both here and here on why the poll might better not be taken at face value. I don't know - I haven't looked into this poll, when it came up here on this thread I just took it at face value. But he seems to do a good job explaining why we should question it.

BUSH FUTURES BEING MANIPULATED

There is now no question whatsoever that the Bush re-election futures contract at Tradesports.com is being manipulated. Yesterday the price of the futures were sold down from about 55 (indicating the market's estimate of a 55% probability of Bush's re-election) to 10 (indicating on a 10% probability) with a single 10,000-lot order entered by a single trader. An order that size represents twice the normal volume of an entire typical day's trading. Within moments after the order was completed, the price recovered back to the low-mid-50's.

According to sources at Tradesports, yesterday's order was entered by the same individual who has heavily sold the Bush futures three times over the past month. The first instance was on September 14, when this trader sold the futures down from the mid-60's to 49.6. The second instance was in the middle of the second presidential debate on October 8, when the futures were sold down from the high 50's to 51.5. The third instance was right after the third presidential debate on October13. As the debate began the futures were priced at 57, and by the end of the debate they had risen to 60. Then a few moments later they were beaten down to 54 in a matter of minutes.

In markets this kind of behavior is called a "speculative attack." The idea is not to sell at the highest price possible -- the normal profit-maximizing strategy of a typical seller. Rather, the idea is to use one's selling to deliberately cause prices to fall. Why would any sane trader try on purpose to sell at low prices? In some cases it is in order to panic other traders into selling at even lower prices, so the attacker can buy back what he sold at a profit -- traders call that a "bear raid." But in a speculative attack the motive is more complicated. It is to cause people in the real world -- not just other traders -- to panic.

The classic example of a speculative attack is when George Soros massively shorted the British pound in September, 1992. The Bank of England was obliged to support the pound's exchange rate under the European Exchange Rate Mechanism. With the pound plunging and the BoE pouring billions into supporting it, prospects for the British economy were damaged -- making the pound even weaker. Eventually the BoE exhausted its will to support the pound , and had to pull out of the ERM. The pound collapsed -- and Soros is said to have made a billion dollars on this speculative attack.

It's all based on what Soros has often written about as his "theory of reflexivity." It's when financial markets affect the real world, and then the real world in turn affects financial markets. It's a vicious cycle set in motion on purpose. Here's a speculation of a different sort: could Soros be behind the manipulation of the Tradesports Bush futures? The amounts of money involved are pocket change to Soros. And it would fit his avowed intention to unseat the President. It would be a cheap way for Soros to damage Bush's credibility and panic his troops. I have no idea whether Soros is behind this or not. But it would fit.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic Sen. John Kerry pulled into a statistical dead heat with President Bush in a seesawing battle for the White House, according to a Reuters/Zogby poll released Monday.

The latest three-day tracking poll showed Kerry and Bush deadlocked at 45 percent apiece barely two weeks before the Nov. 2 election. The president had a 46-44 percent lead over the Massachusetts senator the previous day, and a four-point lead the day before that.

About 7 percent of likely voters say they are still undecided between the two White House rivals.

"This is, as I have said before, the same kind of roller coaster ride we saw in 2000 with the lead changing back and forth and neither candidate able to open up any kind of lead," pollster John Zogby said. [..]

With both candidates battling for every last vote, Bush holds a four-point edge in the suburbs and the two candidates are tied in small cities, the poll found. Kerry comfortably leads Bush among urban voters and Bush holds a strong lead among rural voters.

Kerry, who is Catholic but has sparked opposition among some Catholic bishops by supporting abortion rights, now leads among Catholic voters by 4 percentage points.