Bush Bounce Keeps On Going!

[STING2]

"President leads Kerry by 13 points among likely voters; 8 points among registered voters"


by David W. Moore


"GALLUP NEWS SERVICE"

"PRINCETON, NJ -- In a new Gallup Poll, conducted Sept. 13-15, President George W. Bush leads Democratic candidate John Kerry by 55% to 42% among likely voters, and by 52% to 44% among registered voters. These figures represent a significant improvement for Bush since just before the beginning of the Republican National Convention."

http://www.gallup.com/poll/content/?ci=13066

 

[U2democrat]

That's 1 poll. Many others such as Pew and Harris show strikingly different results.

 

[STING2]

"Latest Showdown State Poll Results
Bush leads in Wisconsin, Kerry in Michigan; Minnesota tied"


by Jeffrey M. Jones

"CNN/USA Today/Gallup’s three latest “showdown states” polls show mixed results in three key Midwestern states -- President George W. Bush has a lead in Wisconsin, Democratic candidate John Kerry leads in Michigan, and Minnesota is tied. The available data in Wisconsin and other showdown states indicate that Bush’s support has increased following the Republican convention. These polls also suggest that if the election were held today Bush could win the electoral votes of three states (Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Minnesota) that Al Gore won in 2000."


http://www.gallup.com/poll/content/login.aspx?ci=13057

 

[STING2]

That's 1 poll. Many others such as Pew and Harris show strikingly different results.

Gallup has a longer and better track record and is more respected.

Fact: The candidate ahead in the GALLUP poll on Labor day has won 13 of the last 17 Presidential elections. Now that were at the 6 week mark, this is not good news for Kerry.

Even if the Gallup poll was a bit off, NO Candidate has ever won the presidency when they were down in the Gallup poll by 13 points or more, 6 weeks from the date of the election.

 

[ThatGuy]

Fact: On 10/26/2000 Gallup showed Bush ahead in their national poll 52 to 39. Did Al Gore make up ten points in two weeks?

Fact: Gallup's polling method assumes that on election day 40% of voters will be Republican while 33% will be Democrats, even though that's historically inaccurate.

 

[DaveC]

What is with your Gallup fetish anyways?

3 other major polls were released today: all three showed a dead heat, or results that were within the margin of error.

Gallup seems to be using some fishy polling. Maybe push polling?

 

[STING2]

What is with your Gallup fetish anyways?

3 other major polls were released today: all three showed a dead heat, or results that were within the margin of error.

Gallup seems to be using some fishy polling. Maybe push polling?

Gallup has been doing polling longer than most other polling groups and is probably the most respected polling group if you had to pick one.

 

[STING2]

Fact: On 10/26/2000 Gallup showed Bush ahead in their national poll 52 to 39. Did Al Gore make up ten points in two weeks?

Fact: Gallup's polling method assumes that on election day 40% of voters will be Republican while 33% will be Democrats, even though that's historically inaccurate.

On the first "Fact", yes for a day during the 2000 election, a poll was a little off. The poll posted above was over three days though.

Not everyone who is registered Republican or regestered democrat vote for their party's candidate. In addition, Gallup is attempting to determine likely voters and and registered voters in their polling. The recent poll finds a ratio of 40% to 33% for Republicans and Democrats respectively. As long as they did it scientifically the results are accurate. They do not go into the polling saying, lets pick 4 Republicans, 4 Democrats and 2 Independents.

Naturally, Democrats hate anything that shows John Kerry doing poorly, so obviously Gallup is now apart of that vast "right wing conspiracy".

 

[U2democrat]

i respect gallup, i just find it odd that it's reporting very different results from the majority of other polls

 

[dazzledbylight]

the latest poll by ...oh dear I can't remember they full name...
it's BDI and stands for Business D ?__{daily}__ Index {i think-- it's a newspaper or specialty magazine, that's consideredconservative} reposts K&B in statistical deadheat.

For all Bush's Gazillions so far to be N&N is not a good thing for Team Bush.

Go K & E!

 

[Flying FuManchu]

I respect Gallup. With that said, Bush did have a huge comeback late in his run in year 2000 and polls with a month and half to go can change a lot. Bush and co. though should be happy and confident going into the debates.

 

[nbcrusader]

It looks like Kerry's criticism of the day strategy isn't working.....

 

[sharky]

From today's Wall St. Journal, which most people would consider conservative:

"Gallup explains it has what it considers a time-tested formula for determining most likely voters. It asks eight questions, such as current intensity of interest, past voting behavior and interest, and whether you know where your voting place is.

"We've discovered that if we ask a set of more indirect questions, we can better predict who is or is not likely to vote," Frank Newport, editor in chief of the Gallup Poll, has said.

But there is reason to suspect those criteria are outdated, especially in an election where both sides say the intensity level is much higher than four years ago and get-out-the-vote organizations are considerably better than ever -- few people on Nov. 2 will be in the dark on where the voting polls are.

"A formula that made sense years ago may not recognize all the changes in society," notes Mr. Hart. "It gives more credence to past behavior and too little to current interest.""

The problem with Gallup is that while it was once respected, it hasn't changed with the times. As mentioned up-thread, the results are weighted with Republicans. In addition, this poll had a small sample size -- only 800, which pushed up the margin of error. And this is only a phone poll. Alot of younger people, myself included, rely solely on our cell phone, which we never receive poll calls on.

I would suggest you look at Zogby polls, which seem to be taking a better cross-section for its polls. Zogby combines traditional polls with email polls to get to a larger group of voters. And generally, because of their larger pool, they have a smaller margin of error.

Gallup is one of a few respected polls -- others include Zogby and Harris. Both of those polls have the race in a dead heat. Gallup is an outlier and they need to change their polling system or risk looking like a bunch of idiots come Election Day.

And of course, this is a national poll. National polls are a waste of time in this election. Because of the closeness of the race, it's all about the state polls.

 

[STING2]

From today's Wall St. Journal, which most people would consider conservative:

"Gallup explains it has what it considers a time-tested formula for determining most likely voters. It asks eight questions, such as current intensity of interest, past voting behavior and interest, and whether you know where your voting place is.

"We've discovered that if we ask a set of more indirect questions, we can better predict who is or is not likely to vote," Frank Newport, editor in chief of the Gallup Poll, has said.

But there is reason to suspect those criteria are outdated, especially in an election where both sides say the intensity level is much higher than four years ago and get-out-the-vote organizations are considerably better than ever -- few people on Nov. 2 will be in the dark on where the voting polls are.

"A formula that made sense years ago may not recognize all the changes in society," notes Mr. Hart. "It gives more credence to past behavior and too little to current interest.""

The problem with Gallup is that while it was once respected, it hasn't changed with the times. As mentioned up-thread, the results are weighted with Republicans. In addition, this poll had a small sample size -- only 800, which pushed up the margin of error. And this is only a phone poll. Alot of younger people, myself included, rely solely on our cell phone, which we never receive poll calls on.

I would suggest you look at Zogby polls, which seem to be taking a better cross-section for its polls. Zogby combines traditional polls with email polls to get to a larger group of voters. And generally, because of their larger pool, they have a smaller margin of error.

Gallup is one of a few respected polls -- others include Zogby and Harris. Both of those polls have the race in a dead heat. Gallup is an outlier and they need to change their polling system or risk looking like a bunch of idiots come Election Day.

And of course, this is a national poll. National polls are a waste of time in this election. Because of the closeness of the race, it's all about the state polls.

Most people that are young do not vote, so the whole cell phone thing is overblown. The Zogby polls predicted a McCain victory over Bush in 2000. Gallup showed the reality though. I really thought McCain had good chance of stealing the nomination from Bush based on the Zogby polls. After that, Gallup became the poll I watched the most.

Gallup has a longer and better track record than any polling institution in the world and just because Dem's feel the results of the poll threatened them does not mean they should start attacking it as part of a vast "right wing conspiracy".

Even if this current poll has some error's, Gallup has not all of a sudden become this irrelevant dinosour that some here suggests. A million miles from that. The Kerry campaign should definitely be concerned. Based on the shake up of their campaign staff, they do take the results from Gallup seriously.

 

[Jamila]

Actually, I hope that Bush takes this poll's results to heart.

OVERCONFIDENCE has most times led to the forerunner's demise as voters think that he is so far ahead of his opponent that there is no reason to vote for the poll leader.

It's kinda like the Aesop fable of "The Tortoise and the Hare".

So, go ahead and think you're that far ahead of your opponent, Mr. Bush. And see where that overconfidence will get you.

DEFINITELY TIME FOR REGIME CHANGE....

 

[DaveC]

More Gallup rants:

Go here first: http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/002806.html

Then click on this link: http://www.electoral-vote.com/ and read the news of the day.

So much for that track record eh?

 

[DaveC]

As well, none of these polls count overseas voters: foreign nationals, troops, etc. and I've been told that the majority of overseas voters are Democratic-leaning.

 

[DaveC]

More proof that Gallup is a right-wing organization:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/9/16/212615/645

Look just at the very top post, the rest is reaction posts.

In case you can't see it, James Clifton, Gallup's CEO is an official GOP donor.

 

[Popmartijn]

More proof that Gallup is a right-wing organization:

That does not have to say anything. Zogby is also Republican, but his polls do have a different outcome than Gallup's. Based on the information I read (on http://www.electoral-vote.com) I do think that Gallup makes some errors in normalising the results. That 40% Republican is a bit high, I think.

C ya!

Marty

 

[sharky]

Most people that are young do not vote, so the whole cell phone thing is overblown. The Zogby polls predicted a McCain victory over Bush in 2000. Gallup showed the reality though. I really thought McCain had good chance of stealing the nomination from Bush based on the Zogby polls. After that, Gallup became the poll I watched the most.

Actually, political analysts are predicting this year will have the largest young voter turn out since the amendment was passed in to give them the right to vote.

As for McCain, alot of people thought he was going to win before Bush started going negative in 2000. And I wouldn't be surprised if Gallup predicted a McCain win as well as a Dean win this year.

Fact of the matter remains that Gallup is an outlier right now.

<b>Pew Research</b>
Bush 46%
Kerry 46%

<b>Harris</b>
Bush 47%
Kerry 48%
Nader 2%

"Based on who he is and his record, do you think George W. Bush deserves to be re-elected for another four years?"
Does 45%
Does not 51%
Not sure 4%

 

[Salome]

perhaps Bush should have worn a helmet during his bounce 4 years ago

 

[Jamila]

Salome -

I was thinking along those lines too!

Overconfidence is a dangerous thing - it often backfires on you. No one should think this election is over. There's a LOT MORE that will happen between now and November.

 

[STING2]

If Bush were down 13 points in the latest Gallup poll, I would be very concerned. This is not about being overconfinent, this is a poll by perhaps the most reputable polling organization that is now having liberals attempt to discredit it because they do not like what they see.

If, Bush does when the election, I cannot wait to hear all the BS attempts to discredit his victory!

 

[STING2]

More Gallup rants:

Go here first: http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/002806.html

Then click on this link: http://www.electoral-vote.com/ and read the news of the day.

So much for that track record eh?

Gallup has an excellant track record regardless of any liberal attempts to discredit simply because they don't like what they see.

I see your bible for predicting the election, electoral-vote.com has Bush with 331 electoral votes to Kerry's 207! Maybe Gallup underestimated Bush's lead currently.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

I don't doubt that Bush is pulling ahead. They (the Bush campaign) since the Convention have been pulling their most successful card at every opportunity (fear) while the Kerry Campaign just seems hopeless. I guess the hope would be that seeing Bush pulling ahead will motivate more lethargic anti-Bush people to get out and vote for Kerry on the day. I guess the fear works both ways

 

[STING2]

I don't doubt that Bush is pulling ahead. They (the Bush campaign) since the Convention have been pulling their most successful card at every opportunity (fear) while the Kerry Campaign just seems hopeless. I guess the hope would be that seeing Bush pulling ahead will motivate more lethargic anti-Bush people to get out and vote for Kerry on the day. I guess the fear works both ways

Except the thing is, you have liberals bashing the idea that Bush is ahead at all, which defeats the purpose of getting lethargic anti-Bush voters out there. Another theory which is one many liberals fear, is that poor poll numbers for Kerry may keep casual supports of Kerry home as they may feel the election is over.

The election is not over at all, but Kerry has a very tough battle if he wants to win. Bush right now is definitely in the drivers seat, but its not over. If the Gallup poll is the most accurate, which I suspect it is, then Bush could not be realistically in a better position than he is right now. I smelled trouble for Kerry after the polling done after the Democratic convention at the beginning of August, and for the past 6 weeks, everything has indicated that is indeed the case.

Kerry came from behind to beat Dean though in the primary's and this election is definitely not over. But history shows that his position currently in the polls at this time, does not favor a victory for him.

That electoral-vote.com site has Kerry with 207 Electoral votes to Bush's 331. Kerry cannot win the election without winning Pennsylvania and New Jersey and Kerry is behind in multiple polls in both states. Kerry new he would have to spend to insure winning Pennsylvania and now he is behind there. Kerry never anticipated he would have to spend any money to win New Jersey and now he will have to make a serious effort. This is money that was supposed to go to taking away places like Ohio, Florida and Missouri from the Republicans.

 

[sharky]

As a liberal, I'm not bashing the fact that Bush is ahead. I'm bashing the fact that someone would use one poll as an end all be all. Harris and Pew Research are also very reputable. How do you refute the numbers they have?

You keep spouting off these vague statements -- "oh, the liberals just want to bash Bush." So tell me, using actual facts, why the numbers I mentioned above were wrong? Are you saying two very professional polls are wrong because they don't show Bush ahead. It's the pot calling the kettle black.

 

[STING2]

As a liberal, I'm not bashing the fact that Bush is ahead. I'm bashing the fact that someone would use one poll as an end all be all. Harris and Pew Research are also very reputable. How do you refute the numbers they have?

You keep spouting off these vague statements -- "oh, the liberals just want to bash Bush." So tell me, using actual facts, why the numbers I mentioned above were wrong? Are you saying two very professional polls are wrong because they don't show Bush ahead. It's the pot calling the kettle black.

I have already gone to great detail to explain why I trust Gallup over any other polling organization that is out there. Gallup has been doing polling longer than anyone and has a better reputation for quality work than any other single polling organazation out there.

Look at www.electoral-vote.com. It is site run by a John Kerry supporter. Currently as of Sunday Sept. 19, Bush has a lead of 331 Electoral Votes to Kerry's 207. Which poll, the Gallup poll or the Harris and Pew Poll, do you think best reflects Bush's 124 electoral vote lead?

I don't think the election is over by any means and I never said that Gallup was 100% perfect. But I do think that Gallup has been consistently over the years, the most accurate and credible polling organization out there, based on the elections I have seen and the results of Gallup polls. Gallup has a longer history of consistent and quality polling than any other polling organization in the world.

If you think Gallup is way off the mark, why do you think Kerry has changed his campaign organization. You only make changes this late in a campaign if your in trouble. Kerry is in trouble but he still does have a chance to win. But if he wants to win, he has a lot of work to do and no media event camparable to a convention to help him.

 

[sharky]

Kerry had a bad August -- everyone agrees. He got bogged down with the stupid Swift Boat ads. So be it -- he changed his campaign to back on message.

As for the Electoral Vote site, you can't compare that to any national polls. Electoralvote.com is strictly state polls. If we went by national polls, Gore would be president right now. You can't compare the two.

 

[STING2]

Kerry had a bad August -- everyone agrees. He got bogged down with the stupid Swift Boat ads. So be it -- he changed his campaign to back on message.

As for the Electoral Vote site, you can't compare that to any national polls. Electoralvote.com is strictly state polls. If we went by national polls, Gore would be president right now. You can't compare the two.

There is actually some information from the Pew Center poll that supports the results in the Gallup poll.

"The Pew Center conducted two waves of polling over a seven-day period between September 8 and Tuesday."

"IN THE FIRST WAVE, BUSH HAD A DOUBLE DIGIT LEAD, but by the final wave of polling, the race had become a dead heat, indicating that the president's momentum had eroded."

"The Gallup Poll, which showed no erosion of momentum, was conducted at roughly the same time as the second wave of polling done by the Pew Center."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/17/presidential.polls/index.html

This suggest that the Pew Center may have made a mistake in its "Second Wave" of polling.

The national poll and the electoral votes are comparable to a certain degree. If someone is behind in most state polls, there is no way they are going to be competitive in a national poll.