Election 2004 running polls thread

Polling Report (includes more detail on questions asked, easier for reading single-poll trend lines; state polls for subscribers)
D.C.'s Political Report (not updated as frequently and less user-friendly, but has lots of state level historical and background data; members get state race polls)

The Upper Midwest is the most dangerous region for Kerry, but I think that it's more likely that he picks up states elsewhere than loses them there.

MSNBC is reporting that a Friday Newsweek tracking poll had K/E over B/C 54-41. The previous day's poll had it at 49-47.

http://www.gallup.com/content/?ci=1258

http://www.electoral-vote.com/ev.png

Rasmussen (Likely Voters)

Before (7/23-25): Tie at 46
After: (7/29-31): Kerry 49-45

(a 4-point bounce in a Republican poll)

Newsweek (Registered Voters)

Before (7/8-9): Kerry 47-44 (3-way), Kerry 51-45 (2-way)
Partly-After (7/29-30): Kerry 49-42 (3-way), Kerry 52-44 (2-way)
After (7/30): Kerry 50-40 (3-way), Kerry 54-41 (2-way)

(so if you use the results that are partly before Kerry's speech, it's a 4-point bounce with Nader, and only a 2-pt bounce without, but if you use the single-day results that are entirely after Kerry's speech, it's a 7-pt bounce whether or not Nader's involved)

ABC/WaPo (Registered Voters)

Before (7/22-25): Bush 48-46 (3-way), Bush 49-48 (2-way)
After (7/30-8/1): Kerry 50-44 (3-way), Kerry 52-45 (2-way)

(an 8-point bounce with Nader, and a 6-point bounce without)

Put these together, and you have an average 7 point bounce. That's just slightly higher than what most people predicted (5-6 points).

What's even better are the internals in the ABC/WaPo poll:

Kerry experienced a net bounce of 12-16 points on trust to handle the following issues: health care, terrorism, Iraq, taxes, education and the economy. He now leads Bush on all of the issues except terrorism, where he trails by only 3 points. He also leads Bush on intelligence and international relations.

He also experienced a net bounce of 10-13 points on personal characteristics including leadership, security, consistency, values, honesty, and empathy. He leads Bush on the last 3 issues (values!) as well as on vision and complexity, and is only 3 points down on security.

Kerry experienced swings in his favor among Southerners (he and Bush are even in the South in this poll), young people, veterans, and white catholics.

Perhaps most importantly, more Kerry supporters than Bush supporters will definitely vote for, and are very enthusiastic about, their candidate. And party identification swung 9 points in favor of the Democrats.

Even before and during the convention, there seemed to be something happening in the South. In addition to the ABC poll, a Zogby 7/26-29 LV poll showed K/E leading B/C in the South 48-46. And the not-necessarily-if-at-all-reliable Zogby Interactive poll has been showing good results for Kerry in Southern battleground states. Kerry has led in Tennessee by 2.2 (7/19-23) and 1.8 (7/26-29), in Florida by 2.8 (7/26-29), in Missouri by 0.7 (7/19-23) and 0.6 (7/26-29), and in West Virginia by 3.4 (7/26-29). I don't know whether to believe this stuff, but the Missouri results are confirmed elsewhere: a CNN/USAT/Gallup 7/19-22 LV poll had a tie at 48, and a Kansas City Star 7/13-20 RV poll had Kerry 46-44.

I join with you in cautious, indeed paranoid, cheer.

A thing I don't like, in fact hate, is when people say things like: 'Kerry may be smart, but Bush is a more likeable guy'. It's like when they said that John Major was the politician you would rather go for a pint with. That was false then, and this is false now. I don't know how much I would like Kerry as a person, rather than as a political force, but such nuances are irrelevant next to the fact that Bush is hateful and disgusting. Anyone who thinks the reverse will never agree with me about anything, and I hate them, too.

until Mark Warner in 2002.

It is Republican, but it has solid Dem constituencies (DC suburbs, SE blacks, a few Appalachian holdouts), some of which are growing fast (tho dunno at what rate relative to the rest of the state).

(i do not approve of that word and am using it only for satirical purposes obviously)

I always thought that whatever Democrat pockets there were in the state were more than overwhelmed by the Republican strongholds elsewhere.

and i know of two people who voted for bush who are voting for kerry: my father and stepmother. my mom, a SOLID republican (christian right and all of that), would've considered voting for edwards over bush (probably would not have in the end, simply due to abortion).

(also: is tidewater a suburban county?)

my stepmother is an old punk-rocker (thanks for the gang of four records when i was 12, karen!) and pretty politically aloof. yet they both voted for bush in 2000. i think they both just feel weary of him. they don't like kerry by any stretch of the imagination -- again, they both would've voted for edwards -- but i think they've just suddenly realized that bush hasn't done the country any good. both supported invading iraq (my dad's partial reasoning: "my son lives in nyc; obl almost killed him; let's kill saddam" -- at times me being in nyc on 9/11 is a badge for him), but both recognize that things there are awful now.

also, my father is like many white middle-class '90s conservatives: ex-hippie who dodged the draft who has decided that he's earned his middle class comfortability and fuck that bill clinton for being better off than him and did he mention that "orientals hate kissing" yet?

i love my dad though.

anyway.

Sometimes, I think that they're only calling people with rotary phones.

This is the first time that Bush has reached the 49% mark in the Tracking Poll since Kerry wrapped up the Democratic nomination on Super Tuesday (March 2). It's also the first time Bush has been up by four points since April 26.

ARG: Kerry 48-46
ABC/WaPo: Kerry 49-48
ICR: Kerry 51-44
Fox: Kerry 46-43
CNN/USAT/Gallup: Kerry 48-47
LA Times: Bush 49-46
NPR: Kerry 50-45
IBD/CSM/TIPP: Tie at 45
CBS: Kerry 47-44

Average result: Kerry 48-45, 7% undecided. If all the undecideds vote, Bush needs 2/3 of them to win. The CW is that 2/3 or close to it go for the challenger.

anyway, if you look at the deviations from the average, excepting the aberrant LAT poll (which is the reverse of the average), Kerry can go to 50 or above, while Bush can't seem to break 48. If Bush starts going posting above-48 numbers in RV polls, we'll have a race. Otherwise, it's close but I still say Kerry has the upper hand.

look at the recent polls and count not the horserace numbers but the outside-the-horserace numbers - the undecideds. they fluctuate between 6 and 8 points. today's result is the same, if at the low end - 6% undecided. same result after the DNC. same as the RV-poll average I identify above. now maybe this phenomenon is explained by the fact that there's a pool of about 10% undecideds who sometimes lean enough one way to get counted for one candidate and at other times won't be pushed out of the middle. or maybe these results are being manufactured by a Republican pollster. or maybe this, the only tracking poll, is telling us something important about the race - it just isn't changing. yes, Kerry once broke out of the margin. and yes, Bush did it yesterday (well, an average of the last 3 days is how they do it) and may do it again. but paying attention to the long term and ignoring the daily up and down, they're within the margin among 'likely voters', 6% of whom remain undecided. 'likely voters' favor Bush more than registered voters in most polls, especially those done by Republican pollsters. and undecideds break for the challenger. Rasmussen is telling us, like the others, that it's close but the odds favor Kerry.

So we'll see what happens in the days to come, but this is nothing special for Bush. LVs and he can't break even 46? Sure, Kerry is down, but he remains within the margin and 10% are undecided.

Kerry holds the Gore states and NH, though it's tight within the margin in WI, PA and IA. Kerry also has tiny leads in FL, MO, and NV. Bush has big, outside-the-margin leads in OH and WV. Interesting that MO looks more Dem than OH. I would chalk that up to this poll's methodology.

however, for some reason the stock market went on a tear today, for short sighted reasons. its as if they think gas will one day go back to being $1.75, but I digress...

That said, I didn't, don't and won't buy the major media outlets' "Kerry's Sky is Falling" headlines, particularly in light of this.

The electoral calculation at that site is worthless because it is based on whatever the the site authors deem the last poll in a given state, regardless of methodology or partisan sponsorship. However, the individual state pages on that site, which compile all the polls for a given state, are very useful.

If national polls reflect what's happening in battleground states how does that analogy explain Bush with a considerable lead in Ohio and Kerry likewise in Michigan?

By your analogy (that national polls reflect what's happening in battleground states) shouldn't the national polls be slanted in favor of one candidate or another? With the noted, outlier exception(s) of this past weekend's two dubious polls, how does this analogy resolve the conflict of neck-and-neck national polls with big swings in battleground states?

It's not an analogy. I don't understand your point.

I also wouldn't say that there's a 'considerable lead' in either state. Michigan is within a few points but essentially safe for Kerry barring any major developments. Ohio is leaning Bush and I'm more pessimistic about it now, but it certainly could go the other way. Are you relying on the Zogby interactive numbers? They are not definitive statements on anything, as far as I can tell. Is there any other evidence Ohio is big for bush? The pre-convention Columbus Dispatch poll had a tie.

Just because the talking heads keep repeating the national numbers doesn't make them relevant -- that is, reflective as you seemed to suggest in your previous post -- of the battleground states.

I suppose I mistook your implication of the national polls' relevance to the percentages in battleground states as drawing a comparison in order to show a similarity in some respect. But if the national polls and the battleground polls are not similar, then you're right: It's not analogy.

I will, however, concede that a 7-point (Kerry's lead over Bush in MI) and 11-point (Bush's lead over Kerry in OH) may not prove to be 'considerable' in the end. But right now? Yes, to me, they seem somewhat daunting.

So hypothetically? Do I believe it's possible the scare-/war-/fearmongering Bush/Cheney campaign might garner more votes in Ohio than it did four years ago? Yes, I believe it's possible.

But I can hear it now, "Oh, Kerry's ahead nationally? I guess I needn't vote..."

My gripe with John Q. Public (and I disdain generalities and therefore am not suprisingly anti-national polls) is that the focus of anyone and everyone's efforts must/should not only be their immediate locale, but also and almost exclusively the ebb and flow of battleground percentages.

John Q. Public needs to be reminded frequently and convincingly that, in America, the candidate who gets the most votes doesn't always finish first.

LVs: Bush 48-47 w/o Nader, tie at 46 w/
RVs: Kerry 47-46 w/o Nader, Kerry 45-43 w/

xpost: which are the two most worthless and why?

South Charleston Mayor Richie Robb said today he may vote against George W. Bush in the Electoral College, even if the president carries West Virginia's popular vote.

CBS RVs 9/6-8: Bush 49-42
Rasmussen LVs 9/6-8: Bush 47.5-46.8
Fox/Opinion Dynamics RVs 9/7-8: Kerry 46-42 w/o Nader, 46-43 w/
Fox/Opinion Dynamics LVs 9/7-8: Bush 47-45 w/o Nader, 47-43 w/

ABC/WaPo comes out tonight

LVs: Bush 52-44
RVs: Bush 50-44
Adults: Kerry 46-45

Internals are terrible for Kerry.

Whats the the big gap between the traditional pollsters and the tv/newsmagazine polls?

the 2-4 point polls:
Rasmussen, LVs, 9/8-10: Bush 47.5-46.1
Zogby, LVs, 9/8-9: Bush 47-45 w/o Nader, 46-42 w/
Democracy Corps, LVs, 9/6-9: Bush 50-47 w/o Nader, 48-45 w/

the 5-8 point polls:
AP-Ipsos, 9/7-9: Bush 51-43 RVs, 51-46 LVs, both w/ Nader
Newsweek, RVs, 9/9-10: Bush 50-45 w/o Nader, 49-43 w/

Time ridiculousness, 9/7-9:
LVs (leaners included): Bush 54-42 w/o Nader, 52-42 w/
RVs (leaners excluded): Bush 51-39 w/o Nader (10% undecided), 50-39 w/

Rasmussen, 9/10-12
LVs: Bush 47.2-46.5

IBD/CSM/TIPP, 9/7-12
RVs: Kerry 46-44 w/o Nader, 45-43 w/
LVs: tie at 47 w/o Nader, tie at 46 w/
Battlegrounds: Kerry 51-40
Independents: Kerry 48-38

Harris Interactive (phone poll), 9/9-13, w/ Nader
LVs: Kerry 48-47

Pew, 9/11-14, w/ Nader
RVs: tie at 46
LVs: Bush 47-46

Democracy Corps, 9/12-14
LVs: Bush 49-48 w/o Nader, Bush 47-45 w/

Colorado - ARG, 9/10-13 w/ Nader
Bush 46-45

the Gallup poll is an embarrassment. compare it to state polls - the level of national support in Gallup is lower than the state support in CO, TN, NC, VA and SC

a second Colorado poll out today shows Bush up only 1

For example, does Gallup pre-emptively select the president-elect in its numbers? Does its polling (errant though it may be in its methodology) encourage or discourage voter turnout?

I hope for the former (as I tend to be a stubborn contrarian), but fear the latter.

3 upper Midwest states: Tie
Ohio: Bush up 1
Florida: Kerry up 1
Virginia: Bush up 4
Washington: Kerry up 5
Oregon: Kerry up 6
Michigan: Kerry up 7
South Carolina: Bush up 7

it was cold & rainy. i registered at least one new voter who was "leaning towards kerry"...

Uh-oh.

The telephone polls do not include cellular phones. There are almost 169 million cell phones being used in America today - 168,900,019 as of Sept. 15, according to the cell phone institute in Washington.

There is no way to poll cell phone users, so it isn't done.

Not one cell phone user has received a call on their cell phone asking them how they plan to vote as of today.

Kerry Losing Lead Over Bush in Illinois

Please. That's a Survey USA poll. A much more reliable poll - Research 2000 - shows Kerry up 54-39, a decisive lead. Illinois is a safe Kerry state.

Internals are good. If things stay the same and the undecideds go to Kerry as predicted, this lines up roughly with my Kerry 51-47 prediction

Nevertheless, it looks to be a good blog in the home stretch.

It is like - like, say, the Bible as a bar code.

But... who knows what tricks and scams are on the way in the coming weeks?

My gut feeling however is that the debates will be crucial. It's all fine and well people thinking Bush is better at 'presenting' himself, but that goes out of the window in a detailed debate about the state of the country. He did very poorly against McCain I remember, and hardly impressed in the Gore debates - if I remember correctly, it was more that people were disappointed in Gore and some were turned off him rather than Bush winning positive support.

Pennsylvania is going to be rather more crucial a Gore state for Kerry to fight and win than the much safer New Jersey. And he ought to win there, but it might be close and organisation will be key.

Tom is right about PA - all along I've been mistakenly thinking it was a Bush state in 2000 and it wasn't. So, of the nine states too close to indicate even a firm lean, five unfortunately remain Gore states from last time (Iowa, Minn, New Mex, Penn, Wisc) - which Kerry MUST win. The only state Rasmussen is calling as a switch is New Hampshire - from Bush '00 to Kerry '04. This plus all the Gore states equals 264 EC votes. Not enough. I've given up on Florida - it's seem improbable that Jeb will allow it slip away - but there's always Ohio.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6159637/site/newsweek/

If so, the Bush lead isn't that much to worry about - the battleground states are all tight, NH looks like coming back to the Dems, perhaps CO too, in OH they're registering new voters like crazy (er, as long as the forms are of the correct paper stock...) and so on. It's not beyond the realms of possibility, etc.

And now maybe the Bush lead has gone - for good. Godspeed John Edwards.

Let's hope it's a cumulative effect and the remaining three debates sway people in the same direction. Perhaps this wave of new voter registration in OH, FL and elsewhere will be decisive.