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

Well as a diehard Cowboys fan, I can't TELL you how difficult it will be to have to root for the Redskins. But, my country needs me.

0 Replies

Good morning, all.

Quote:

Reuters-Zogby 10-/26: Bush Keeps Three-Point Lead on Kerry

By John Whitesides, Political Correspondent
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush holds a slim three-point lead over Democratic rival John Kerry one week before the Nov. 2 presidential election, according to a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Tuesday.

Bush led Kerry 49-46 percent in the latest three-day national tracking poll, maintaining a stable lead on the Massachusetts senator as the White House rivals head down the stretch. Bush led Kerry 48-45 percent the day before ...

... "If Kerry, as suggested, is looking to undecideds, look again -- there may not be enough left," pollster John Zogby said ...

... Kerry still has big leads among key Democratic constituencies like African Americans and union members, but now trails Bush among women, youth and seniors ...

0 Replies

Doesn't it seem, however, that with the emotional charge built into this campaign, that a huge turnout will occur? And doesn't a large turnout normally favour Dem's?

0 Replies

Seems like there is some possibility that Badnarik will be Nader's equal and opposite spoiler -- THAT'd be cool! (Great commercial...)

Quote:

A Nader Nibble From the Right

The commercial made its national debut on Thursday on the Fox News Channel, aimed directly at Mr. Bush's Republican base. It starts with a middle-aged man disgustedly dropping his Wall Street Journal on the kitchen table. "What kind of conservative runs half-trillion-a-year deficits? Gets us into an unwinnable war?" he asks his wife, but adds helplessly, "I can't vote for Kerry."

"Then don't," she says, cheerily suggesting an alternative who is not quite yet a household name: Michael Badnarik, a computer consultant from Austin, Tex.

Mr. Badnarik is the presidential candidate of the Libertarian Party, which says he could "Naderize" Mr. Bush. A recent Zogby/Reuters national poll showed him tied with Ralph Nader at one percentage point each - not much, but possibly critical. Unlike Mr. Nader, Mr. Badnarik is on the ballot of every battleground state except New Hampshire.

"If we have a rerun of Florida 2000 in Pennsylvania, Michael Badnarik could be the kingmaker by drawing independent and Republican votes from Bush," said Larry Jacobs, director of the 2004 Election Project at the Humphrey Institute of the University of Minnesota, which has been tracking third-party candidates.

Mr. Badnarik, reached by telephone on Thursday while campaigning in Michigan, said that polls commissioned by his campaign showed him at 2 percent in Wisconsin, 3 percent in Nevada and 5 percent in New Mexico.

He dispatched quickly with most of the major campaign issues. Foreign policy? "I would be bringing our troops home from Iraq and 135 other countries." Taxes? "I would eliminate the I.R.S. completely." Health care? "Of all the things I want the government out of, health care is probably the first thing."

The only issue he ducked was abortion. Although the Libertarian platform supports abortion rights, he said, the party is almost evenly divided on the question. "It's not a religious issue," Mr. Badnarik explained. "It's a property-rights issue: at what point does the baby take ownership of its own body? I do not have a clear-cut answer."

(Second item, after the IQ one.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/24/politics/campaign/24points.html

0 Replies

Interesting find Foxy... Confused

... Hmmm... Well, I for one would rather welcome a new President to the oval office than watch my Packers go into the bye week at 3 and 5. Some things are just more important than others.

http://www.weeklyreader.com/images/vote2_final.jpg

Go Packers!
Besides, I think Timber's link already put the final nail in Kerry's coffin. :wink:

0 Replies

Could be worse, bill. I am a Titan fan. Crying or Very sad

0 Replies

Think again. The poor news this week on both Iraq and the economy is going to kill Bush.

http://money.cnn.com/2004/10/26/news/economy/confidence/index.htm?cnn=yes

Quote:

Consumer confidence down

Conference Board reading declines for third straight month; an election omen?
October 26, 2004: 10:54 AM EDT

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Consumers are less confident about the economy for the third straight month, according to the Conference Board's October survey released Tuesday, with the closely watched economic reading weaker than Wall Street expectations.

The confidence index fell to 92.8 from a revised 96.7 reading in September. Economists surveyed by Briefing.com had forecast the index to fall to 94.0 in the latest survey. The latest number is the worst reading since March, when the index stood at 88.5.

The decline is a potentially troubling sign for President Bush, seeking re-election next week. Since the 1968 election, a Conference Board index reading below 100 generally indicates a loss for the incumbent's party.

Consumer confidence is also important for predicting consumer spending, especially on big ticket items. And since consumer spending is responsible for about two-thirds of the nation's economy, confidence is important for showing the future of the nation's economic growth.

The survey of 5,000 U.S. households found more concern about future economic conditions than about the current state of the economy. The expectations sub-index declined to 92.0 from 97.7, while the present situation sub-index only slipped to 94.2 from 95.3.

People are a bit more bullish on the current labor market. The percentage of consumers saying jobs are "plentiful" increased to 17.4 percent from 16.6 percent, while the percentage claiming jobs are "hard to get" was little changed, edging down to 27.8 percent from 28.0 percent in September.

But those surveyed expecting fewer jobs to become available in the coming months rose to 18.4 percent from 16.2 percent, while those who see more jobs ahead fell to 16.5 percent from 17.8 percent.

And the outlook for their own paychecks is also getting worse, as those who expect their incomes to improve in the months ahead fell to 18.4 percent from 20.0 percent last month.

Robert Brusca, economist with FAO Economics, said the readings raise some concern about the level of future consumer spending, particularly heading into the all-important holiday season for retailers.

"I think it's a bit early to make forecasts on holiday spending; people can find themselves caught up in the holiday spirit," he said. "But if you're really concerned about your job, it'll be tough to get anyone to lift your spirits enough to lift your credit card significantly."

From www.electoral-vote.com :

Quote:

The future belongs to the young. And maybe the election, too. Gallup did a survey among first time voters and determined that they prefer Kerry to Bush by a huge margin, 50% to 35%. First time voters are primarily in the 18-29 year age range. This is the same population that may have been undersampled in the polls because many of them have only a cell phone and no landline. Zogby's tracking poll, which breaks down the results by demographic group, shows a similar result. Young (18-29) voters have markedly different preferences than the population as a whole. In six of the ten states surveyed, Kerry leads by double digits. These are Colorado (32%), Florida (22%), New Mexico (28%), Pennsylvania (15%), Wisconsin (16%), and Michigan (32%). In Nevada Kerry's lead is 8%. Bush leads among younger voters in two states: Iowa (4%) and Minnesota (20%). The latter number defies all reason. I wonder if it was a typo. Maybe if enough people ask Zogby to double check this, we'll find out. But the conclusion is clear: if younger voters break with tradition and actually vote in large numbers this time, it could swing the election.

Cycloptichorn

p.s. I predict(hope for) 8 wins for my Texans this year

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

Mr. Badnarik is the presidential candidate of the Libertarian Party, which says he could "Naderize" Mr. Bush. A recent Zogby/Reuters national poll showed him tied with Ralph Nader at one percentage point each - not much, but possibly critical. Unlike Mr. Nader, Mr. Badnarik is on the ballot of every battleground state except New Hampshire.

Hmmm ... would be an interesting scenario. Perhaps the ad will make it actually a possibility, who knows. But for now, it's wishful thinking I'm afraid ...

Here's the Zogby data (see here and here):

Oct 16: Nader 1.0 Badnarik 0.1
Oct 17: Nader 1.0 Badnarik 0.0
Oct 18: Nader 1.5 Badnarik 0.0
Oct 19: Nader 1.2 Badnarik 0.1
Oct 20: Nader 1.0 Badnarik 0.4
Oct 21: Nader 0.8 Badnarik 0.7
Oct 22: Nader 1.0 Badnarik 0.7
Oct 23: Nader 1.0 Badnarik 0.4
Oct 24: Nader 1.1 Badnarik 0.0
Oct 25: Nader 1.1 Badnarik 0.0

Note that the tracking poll involves three-day cycles. Every poll is based on the samples of three subsequent days. Every day they add a new day's sample and drop one day's data. So if there's suddenly a sample that has a bunch more voters for one candidate than usual, that sample will tick along in the numbers for three consecutive days.

What I see above is Badnarik scoring zero or zero-point-one percent, but in two consecutive days' samples suddenly getting 1%, before dropping back to zero again. I.e., on Oct 20, two days of 0,0 or 0,1 get combined with a first day sample of 1% -> makes for a three-day average of 0,4. On Oct 21, a second 1% day is added, taking the three-day average up to 0,7%. In the Oct 22 sample, Badnarik's numbers are back to 0,0/0,1% again, but the two previous 1% days keep the average at 0,7. Oct 23 brings another 0,0 sample, taking the three-day average down to 0,4, and yet another 0,0 sample on Oct 24 brings Badnarik's numbers back to zero.

In short, the sequence above shows Badnarik getting 0,0% or 0,1% in at least five subsequent days before the blip, then a blip of two samples with him getting 1%, then another four days of nothing. Not a healthy pattern.

In fact, even the Green Party's Cobb appears to be doing better in Zogby's last ten days' numbers, scoring 0,6%, 0,6%, 0,1%, 0,1%, 0,2%, 0,2%, 0,4%, 0,2% and 0,2% respectively.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Besides, I think Timber's link already put the final nail in Kerry's coffin. :wink:

Hardly. It's just one of four tracking polls, two of which (as of yesterday) have Kerry in the lead.

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:
Besides, I think Timber's link already put the final nail in Kerry's coffin. :wink:

Hardly. It's just one of four tracking polls, two of which (as of yesterday) have Kerry in the lead.

Did you miss the pic? I was talking about this link. :wink:

0 Replies

Oh - the school kids' elections! I thought you meant the link he posted next, on the Reuters/Zogby daily tracking poll.

On those pesky tracking polls, two further updates:

TIPP

Bush 49 (-1)
Kerry 43 (+1)

Rasmussen

Bush 47,8 (+1,4)
Kerry 47,8 (-0,6)

And two new regular national polls:

Democracy Corps (compared with 4 days ago):

Bush 47 (no ch.)
Kerry 49 (no ch.)
Nader 1 (no ch.)

LA Times (compared with late November):

Bush 48 (-3)
Kerry 48 (+3)
Nader 1 (-1)

(in the 2-way race Bush leads Kerry 49 to 48)

0 Replies

Rasmussen 10/26: Bush 47.8, Kerry 47.9 Bush up 1.4, Kerry off 0.6 from yesterday; 2 point net gain for Bush overnight.

Perhaps counterbalanced by TIPP ONLINE 10/26: Bush 49, Kerry 43, a net Kerry overnight gain of 2 points.

So with the overnight shifts in those two, we've got no net change in the overall average; however slight, Bush as yet retains the advantage with 6 days of campaign remaining.

0 Replies

And don't forget about this surefire predictor either...

Quote:

The winner in every election since 1980 has been the candidate whose masks were most popular on Halloween.

Bush masks have been outselling those of Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry by a 57 percent to 43 percent margin...

Now, that is especially telling when you consider that you have to purchase two John Kerry masks to do that costume justice. Idea

0 Replies

And don't forget about this surefire predictor either...

Quote:

The winner in every election since 1980 has been the candidate whose masks were most popular on Halloween.

Bush masks have been outselling those of Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry by a 57 percent to 43 percent margin...

Now, that is especially telling when you consider that you have to purchase two John Kerry masks to do that costume justice. Idea

0 Replies

That could just mean that people think Bush is scarier... ;-)

0 Replies

I did my own straw poll this morning. I had four calls at four home offices in the great Albuquerque area. All four homes were owned by less-than-youthful accountants--I'm guessing the youngest was 70+. All four had Bush/Cheney signs in their front yards. I'm predicting Bush gets the senior vote. Smile

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

And don't forget about this surefire predictor either...

Quote:
The winner in every election since 1980 has been the candidate whose masks were most popular on Halloween.

Bush masks have been outselling those of Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry by a 57 percent to 43 percent margin...

Now, that is especially telling when you consider that you have to purchase two John Kerry masks to do that costume justice.

That and you probably also need to buy a Herman Munster outfit to complete the ensemble.

0 Replies

I found this NY times article about election predictions hilarious. Enjoy:

NY Times- David Brooks

Thus Ate Zarathustra
By DAVID BROOKS

Published: October 26, 2004

Deep at the end of every election campaign, after all the issues have been beaten to death, when only the blowhards are still thundering, attention turns to the outcome. Who is going to win this thing already?
It is only now that the dinner party lion emerges to stake his claim to greatness. While others quiver with pre-election anxiety, their mood rising and collapsing with the merest flicker of the polls, he alone radiates certainty. He alone can read the internals, cross-tabs and trends, can parse Gallup and Zogby and emerge with clear answers. He alone can captivate a gathering, while men hang eagerly on his words and women undress him with their eyes.

He begins his dinner party performance with a combination of impressive name-dropping and crushing banality: "I was talking to Karl the other day - Karl Rove - and he mentioned that winning the most electoral votes is the key to winning the election. And when I bumped into Tim - Tim Russert - at Colin and Alma's place, he agreed."
Having established his place among the pantheon of Those Who Know, he unfurls a series of impressive, counterintuitive but probably meaningless factoids: "You know, historically, polls conducted during the third week in September have proved to be more accurate in predicting the final result than ones conducted closer to Election Day."

By this point soup will be cooling in the bowls. His dinner companions will be waiting for him to validate their highest hopes or underline their fears. The lion must be careful not to utter a final prediction too quickly.
Instead the suspense must build gradually but relentlessly. He runs through the bogus subdemographic groups that could swing the vote: cellphone-using creationists (undersampled by current survey methods) or African-American gun-owning deacons, who have been so intriguingly cross-pressured for several months.

This is followed by a bout of ostentatious historical parallelism - the pundit will remark upon astounding similarities between this election and that of 1884. At this point another person in the group, driven vicious with envy, may retort that actually, he would have thought the better comparison was to the 1916 election. The pundit should allow a forgiving smile to play upon his lips before riposting, "Yes, I can see why you would have thought that, but the campaigns' private polling suggests otherwise."
References to the private polling are like the neutron bombs of political discourse - quiet but devastating.

Now dominating the table, the pundit should indulge in the sort of storytelling beloved by swing-state-travel braggarts. He should speak in counties, about his trips through Cuyahoga, Macomb, Muscatine and Broward. If somebody mentions she has an aunt living in Ridgeville just south of Dayton, he should fondly recall the exceptional Waffle House there.

Donning the false modesty worn by Those Who Talk to Voters, he should
describe how he humbly listens to the volk, while making it clear that only someone as brilliant as himself could discern national trends from 13 conversations.

Having studied the classic bildungsroman "How to Make Love Like a Pundit" (Universitat de Gemeinschaft, 1989), he should pretend the campaigns actually know what they are doing, and aren't dominated by sleep-deprived spinmeisters with attention spans like a potato grub's.
He must give broad hints of the hidden structures that shape the electorate. He must make sure his listeners do not recall that most voters have only the foggiest notions of what they are voting on. As a Cato Institute study reminds us, 70 percent of voters do not know about the new prescription drug benefit, 60 percent know little about the Patriot Act, and during the cold war, only 38 percent of voters knew that the Soviet Union was not a member of NATO.

These facts suggest that in close elections, the results are a crapshoot, which would undermine the pundit's claim to expertise. So he should conclude his peroration with mendacious specificity, about the remarkable shift in Lithuanian voters in northwest Pennsylvania, or the way the missing Iraqi munitions story is having a devastating effect on Bush leaners near Kenosha.

Then, having filled the air with 45 minutes of bogus pontification and pretentious gibberish, he should sagely declare that this election is just too close to call and that it would be irresponsible to make a prediction.
When his companions start throwing steak knives, he should retire for the evening.

0 Replies

LOL! Very funny, Steppenwolf. Thanks for posting that, gonna mail that to someone I know.

Loved the bit at the end where he does a double-take and himself goes into the routine he's mocking ("As a Cato Institute study reminds us, 70 percent of voters ...") - very clever. ;-)

0 Replies

Some state polls?

First, "the big three":

Pennsylvania
There's been about a poll out every single day for Pennsylvania the past ten days. Here's the ones released the past week, starting with the most recent:

Kerry 53 Bush 45 - Survey USA
Kerry 48 Bush 45 - Zogby daily
Kerry 50 Bush 47 - ARG
Kerry 47 Bush 45 - Zogby daily
Kerry 51 Bush 46 - Keystone
Kerry 49 Bush 46 - Rasmussen
Kerry 48 Bush 46 - Muhlenberg
Kerry 46 Bush 44 - Mason-Dixon
Kerry 51 Bush 46 - Quinnipiac

Nine times Kerry ahead.

Florida
Last Sunday, there were a whopping six polls out for Florida alone. Here's the ones released the past week, starting with the most recent:

Bush 48 Kerry 47 - Zogby daily
Bush 46 Kerry 49 - ARG
Bush 49 Kerry 47 - Strategic Vision
Bush 46 Kerry 46 - Insider Advantage
Bush 51 Kerry 43 - Gallup
Bush 48 Kerry 50 - Survey USA
Bush 48 Kerry 48 - Rasmussen
Bush 49 Kerry 46 - Zogby daily
Bush 47 Kerry 48 - Research 2000
Bush 46 Kerry 46 - Schroth
Bush 49 Kerry 46 - Strategic Vision

Five times Bush ahead, three times Kerry and three times tied.

Ohio
Compared with that polling onslaught, the poll a day released for Ohio the past week almost seems modest again:

Bush 47 Kerry 50 - Survey USA
Bush 46 Kerry 45 - Zogby daily
Bush 50 Kerry 46 - Rasmussen
Bush 47 Kerry 49 - ARG
Bush 48 Kerry 47 - Strategic Vision
Bush 47 Kerry 42 - Zogby daily
Bush 48 Kerry 46 - Strategic Vision
Bush 46 Kerry 50 - Scripps Howard
Bush 47 Kerry 48 - Gallup

Five times Bush ahead, four times Kerry.

OK, say we assume Pennsylvania goes for Kerry. Then we're left with the other two. Thus far, I'd assumed Ohio to be a better bet for Kerry than Florida, but this past week, the numbers don't confirm that. If either of them wins both, then basically the race is run.

But one of them is not enough. If Bush wins one and Kerry the other, the contest continues in ... "the small three". And while the big three are being hailed with phone polls, the small three, Iowa excepted, have been accorded less attention.

Wisconsin
Only two pollsters have done Wisconsin the past week: Zogby, who's on the second day of his tracking poll there now, and Republican pollster Strategic Vision.

Bush 48 Kerry 46 - Zogby daily
Bush 49 Kerry 45 - Strategic Vision
Bush 48 Kerry 45 - Zogby daily

However, just a day over a week ago four further polls were released:
Bush 49 Kerry 47 - Strategic Vision
Bush 48 Kerry 47 - Humphrey Inst.
Bush 50 Kerry 44 - Gallup
Bush 47 Kerry 47 - ARG

Iowa
Iowa's had four pollsters release a poll the past week, and one the day before. Starting with the latest:

Bush 47 Kerry 44 - Zogby daily
Bush 47 Kerry 45 - Zogby daily
Bush 48 Kerry 46 - Rasmussen
Bush 48 Kerry 48 - Strategic Vision
Bush 51 Kerry 45 - Survey USA
Bush 45 Kerry 46 - Central Surveys

New Mexico
This week's enigma. Only Zogby's out there:

Bush 50 Kerry 42 - Zogby daily
Bush 49 Kerry 44 - Zogby daily

Just over a week ago there were two more polls; one by ARG, known for reporting numbers that are consistently a bit off to Kerry's side, and one by Mason-Dixon, that had a series of state polls out that week that were strikingly favourable to Bush. This is what they had:
Bush 46 Kerry 48 - ARG
Bush 49 Kerry 44 - Mason-Dixon

Now this aint good. Bush has the advantage in all three states. And even if Kerry wins Ohio, if he doesn't win Florida and Bush takes all these three, it's still over. Hell: if Kerry takes Ohio (as well as Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Minnesota and Hawaii, all still in contest), but doesn't take Florida, then Bush only needs two of these three to get elected: Wisconsin and Iowa or Wisconsin and New Mexico. (In the latter case, Bush would be elected President by the House, as it'd be an EV tie).

Ergo, if Kerry wins Ohio but not Florida, he also still needs to win at least two of these "small three" himself, doesn't matter which two. That looks like it's gonna be hard. So it's back down to Florida?

If Kerry wins Florida (as well as the bunch of still-contested states mentioned above, including the currently precarious Minnesota), but not Ohio, he also still needs to win one of these "small three". Otherwise, still no deal. Unless he takes Arkansas by surprise, where two of the last three polls have the race within a 2% margin. Perhaps if Clinton goes there before the month's end?

There are lots more theoretical scenarios, but this is the basic set-up in terms of what Kerry would need to win.

Now if you go to Daly's blog, he's got a fine summary of it all, which outlines all the possible permutations.

This is the deal: in his ECB state designations, he now has 203 EV-worth of states leaning to Kerry and 221 EV-worth of states leaning to Bush. Of the remaining states (114 EV), he has marked two (PA and NH) as showing a slight advantage to Kerry and four (the "small three" plus AR) showing a slight advantage to Bush, leaving FL, OH, MN and HI as the true toss-ups.

But in his post he warns: last time around, all but one of the states he had designated as at least leaning to one or the other candidate did indeed go that way. But the states he had assigned a slight advantage this way or that turned out to almost as often turn the other way round after all. So forget the slight advantages, he says, basically. And so he arrived at the map below and based on that, a range of at least a dozen resulting theoretical scenarios of how the chips may fall.

http://home.comcast.net/~gerrydal/map/leaners.jpg

Now myself I'm still holding out hope for West-Virginia. And the Kerry campaign apparently hasn't given up on Nevada yet, though it's cancelled a Kerry trip to Denver, Colorado. But all three states are tricky.

In Colorado, seven subsequent polls by five different pollsters this month showed a Bush lead of at least 5%. Only Zogby's new tracking poll dissented, showing Kerry up by 4%, a lead shrunk to 1% in the poll's second day.

In Nevada, Kerry hasn't been ahead in any poll since late July. The median of the six polls out this month had Bush up by 4%, with only Research2000 showing a tighter 2% margin and 3 other polls showing Bush up by 6%, 7% and 10%.

Of these three 'extra' states, I'd personally stick with West-Virginia, in fact. Only two polls out there this month: one showing Bush up by 5%, one by just 2%. Unfortunately, the Kerry campaign seems to have given up on this state. The only poll out in Virginia this month also has Bush up by only 4%, but again, the campaign has mostly pulled out.

0 Replies

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

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know