Daily Kos

View Story | 56 comments

  •  The Gallup poll has GOT to be way off! (none / 0)

    It has Bush with more of a lead in Edwards' NC than any other poll has Bush in the lead by in any other Southern state besides Texas and Mississippi.

    That's just plain absurd.  And not only is it way inconsistent with the Mason-Dixon, and ditto the Rasmussen poll from last month, but you'd also expect that NC wouldn't be totally out of line with the recent polls in VA and SC, which show Bush with single-digit leads.  (You'd figure K-E to be doing better in NC than in SC; the VA comparison could go either way.)

    One favorable poll result I'm pretty dubious about is Zogby's claim that Kerry's pulled into a tie with Bush in TN.  I'd want to see some corroboration on that one.

    by RT on Thu Jul 15, 2004 at 09:41:11 AM PDT

    •  Gallup (4.00 / 3)

      Gallup's sample of Registered Voters is actually 51-44 Bush, which is somewhat more in line with the other poll results. It's only when they apply their mysterious "likely voter" formula that the lead swells. This is nearly a constant with Gallup polling this cycle. Kerry does much better amongst the larger (and at this stage, infinitely more accurate) RV sample. Look at the latest national numbers:

      LV--Kerry 50, Bush 45, Nader 3
      RV--Kerry 50, Bush 42, Nader 4

      Somehow that LV forumula mystically adds three points to Bush's total.

      Pay little attention to the LV right now. Lots of pollsters use voting patterns from the 2002 cycle for the likely voter screening, and that was, as we know, an unusually poor Dem cycle.

      Moreover, bear in mind that since NC has gone consistently Republican in presidential elections, you're going to have more Republicans who have voted in past presidential elections than Democrats--so that skews the "likely voter" count toward the rethugs.

      Likely voter samples largely ignore the highly motivated 2004 Dem base.

      by mattb25 on Thu Jul 15, 2004 at 10:06:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And it doesn't tell (none / 0)

        you about passion.  This cycle, it is becoming apparent in my travels that registered voter is just about the same as likely voter.

        Turnout is going to be up, and that spells doom for Bush.

        That, and no way in hell does Nader get 4 percent or even 3 percent in NC.

        God it's so painful that something that's so close, is still so far out of reach. Tom Petty/Al Gore

        by Velvet Revolution on Thu Jul 15, 2004 at 10:22:06 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Nader (none / 0)

          He won't even make the ballot here, so I'd peg him down around 0%

          by apostropher on Thu Jul 15, 2004 at 10:37:33 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Not even 3% (none / 0)

          Nader's not going to get on the ballot here, so if 3% of people in NC are willing to write him in.. well, that is just sad to me.

          They're freedom haters. We're freedom lovers. Don't tell Canada. - David Cross

          by noshenanigans on Thu Jul 15, 2004 at 10:54:02 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  One thing about RV (none / 0)

          is that not all the voters who will vote in Nov. are  registered yet.  Voter reg drives will add new voters to the rolls, and I suspect that there will be more net Dems than Reps.

          -7.75,-7.54; The GOP stands for three things: thuggery, buggery, and skullduggery. America, watch your backs, and hide your wallets and your sons!

          by erik in grayslake on Thu Jul 15, 2004 at 01:39:59 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Re: One thing about RV (none / 0)

            "One thing about RV is that not all the voters who will vote in Nov. are  registered yet.  Voter reg drives will add new voters to the rolls, and I suspect that there will be more net Dems than Reps."

            While this certainly could be true this year...

            Almost every study ever done shows that non-voters closely mirror the political preferences of voters.  The theory that Democrats would partisanly benefit if 100% of Americans voted isn't true.

            Visit Petey's New Diary - Are you making a difference?

            by NoDissentAllowed on Thu Jul 15, 2004 at 02:31:03 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  links? (none / 0)

              That's hard to believe. Do you have any links to such studies? My understanding has always been that non-voting but registered voters tend towards the poor, minorities, and working classes -- not your typical R demography.

              And certainly targeting voter registration drives in heavily democratic voting precincts can drive up the D numbers significantly. Especially in congressional races. I certainly hope its being done.

              "There's no housing bubble..." - Fed Chief Ben Bernanke, 10/27/2005

              by chuco35 on Thu Jul 15, 2004 at 03:20:35 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Re: links? (none / 0)

                "That's hard to believe."

                I agree it's slightly counter-intuitive.

                "Do you have any links to such studies?"

                Not at hand.  Try Google.

                "My understanding has always been that non-voting but registered voters tend towards..."

                FWIW, the studies I've seen are talking about the lack of difference between actual voters and all eligible adults, not registered non-voters.  But I'd guess registered non-voters would be similar as well.

                Visit Petey's New Diary - Are you making a difference?

                by NoDissentAllowed on Thu Jul 15, 2004 at 03:32:48 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

View Story | 56 comments