You gotta love Zogby

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: Engineer
Wow...Zogby had Bush by 3% at this same time vs Gore during 2000 (Saw on CNN) (Lou Dobbs). Things can and will change quickly. 🙂

sure can, but this time there won't be some drunk driving thing come out about Bush. It'll probably be bad news for Kerry.

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: ntdz
Zogby has Bush up nationally 48% to 45% over John Kerry. It also has Bush up 49% to 46% in Flordia and 47% to 42% in Ohio. Ouch. Once again, try to explain it, try to discredit it, but don't accept it. That's the motto of the democrats, just like in 2000.

Edit: Link for the losers that wont believe it

http://www.reuters.com/newsArt...ws&storyID=6597243

http://www.electoral-vote.com

Your Title needs fixing

Topic Title: You gotta love Zogby

should be:

Topic Title: If you are a Neocon, you gotta love Zogby

you just love to throw that word around dont you...:roll:

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: Engineer
Wow...Zogby had Bush by 3% at this same time vs Gore during 2000 (Saw on CNN) (Lou Dobbs). Things can and will change quickly. 🙂

sure can, but this time there won't be some drunk driving thing come out about Bush. It'll probably be bad news for Kerry.

Sure seemed bad news today for the Shrub.

 

[villager]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: Engineer
Wow...Zogby had Bush by 3% at this same time vs Gore during 2000 (Saw on CNN) (Lou Dobbs). Things can and will change quickly. 🙂

sure can, but this time there won't be some drunk driving thing come out about Bush. It'll probably be bad news for Kerry.

Sure seemed bad news today for the Shrub.

Left out the best poll I saw on CNN, Arkansas 46-46!!

 

[conjur]

Zogby on 10/23:
http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=903

Pollster John Zogby: ?Another good single day of polling for President Bush. In today?s sample alone, he leads 50% to 43%?the first time we?ve seen either candidate hit 50%. Each candidate continues to tighten his own constituency, and Undecided voters are now at only 4%.

Zogby on 10/22:

Pollster John Zogby: "Bush had a stronger single day of polling, leading Kerry 49% to 46%. For the first time, in the one-day sample Bush had a positive re-elect, 49% to the 48% who feel it's time for someone new. Also in the one-day sample, Undecideds were only 4%. Could Undecideds be breaking for Bush?

Therefore, since Bush was up 6% on the 23rd and 3% on the 22nd, in order for Bush's lead to be at 3% means Kerry had to have had a strong Sunday.

 

[MidasKnight]

Originally posted by: chess9
Screw the polls. Get out and vote.

It's time to go mano a mano. 🙂

Give me your best shot. 🙂

-Robert

:thumbsup:

 

[TBone77]

Originally posted by: Todd33
Assuming Zogby is correct (they have been high all year), 48% still is a losing number historically. Incumbents need to poll at 50% to win. But please, celebrate early, be that one dumbass that gloats and then disappears from the forums after the elections.

Wow... you'll sure look foolish if YOU'RE the one who's wrong after a statement like that.

 

[chess9]

Actually, he's right if you are thinking historically. This election may be sui generis, however, with all the new registrants, cell phone voters, and young voters, all of whom COULD bring Kerry's percentages up if they vote. The old rule was that under 50% an incumbent is probably a dead duck or will just sqeek by. Most political pros would tell an incumbent that if he had a 10 point lead he was safe, a 6-7 point lead was getting hairy and anything under 5 points would be disaster.


-Robert

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: chess9
Actually, he's right if you are thinking historically. This election may be sui generis, however, with all the new registrants, cell phone voters, and young voters, all of whom COULD bring Kerry's percentages up if they vote. The old rule was that under 50% an incumbent is probably a dead duck or will just sqeek by. Most political pros would tell an incumbent that if he had a 10 point lead he was safe, a 6-7 point lead was getting hairy and anything under 5 points would be disaster.

Yeah, I tend to agree. I'm pretty sure that undecided voters typically vote for the non-incumbant candidate, more often than not. If it's this close, I think Kerry may take it all next week. I wouldn't bet any money on it, however. 😉

 

[Pliablemoose]

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.

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

Reuters/Zogby poll

 

[conjur]

And Kerry gained 2% in the new tracking poll. That means he was up a good 4-6% in yesterday's polling.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: conjur
And Kerry gained 2% in the new tracking poll. That means he was up a good 4-6% in yesterday's polling.

Listened to the Zogby Daily Exclusive on Reuters and he said that Kerry lead Bush by over 5% on yesterday's numbers.

 

[preslove]

Electoralvote had kerry way up yesterday. These polls are nearlly worthless. The whole "likely voter" methodology totally ignores new voters.

 

[Engineer]

Swing voters polling Kerry's way.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: preslove
Electoralvote had kerry way up yesterday. These polls are nearlly worthless. The whole "likely voter" methodology totally ignores new voters.

electoral vote ONLY uses registered voters. Bush is winning in electoral-vote.com. Need i say more?

 

[preslove]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: preslove
Electoralvote had kerry way up yesterday. These polls are nearlly worthless. The whole "likely voter" methodology totally ignores new voters.

electoral vote ONLY uses registered voters. Bush is winning in electoral-vote.com. Need i say more?

Are you really that stupid? electoral-vote.com collects other people's polls and then puts it on a map on their nicely designed website. They do not do any actual polling.

My point was that these polls aren't very accurate. look at ev's collection of the final polls in 2000. Not one got it accurately Text

 

[aphex]

No offense, but i don't trust any polls.....

The reason? "The telephone poll of 1203 likely voters was conducted from Sunday through Tuesday"

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=909

1203? Im sorry, but IMO that is definately not enough to give a reasonable estimate of how the country will vote.

 

[preslove]

A quick look at the methodology zogby employs shows that anybody who didn't vote in 2000, has moved recently, does not follow local politics, or doesn't care for kerry/bush but is voting for them anyway because this is a super important election year, will NOT be included in the "likely voter" category. Their methodology is pretty screwyand does not give an accurate snap-shot of the national feeling. National political polls are almost absolutely worthless when viewed independently. They are somewhat valuable when looking for trends, which is bad news for bush, since he has had a tendency to lose ground steadily between the bumps of 9/11, Iraq, and his convention.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: aphex
No offense, but i don't trust any polls.....

The reason? "The telephone poll of 1203 likely voters was conducted from Sunday through Tuesday"

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=909

1203? Im sorry, but IMO that is definately not enough to give a reasonable estimate of how the country will vote.

Never taken a statistics class, eh?


But, yeah, polls are generally to be ignored...esp. this late in the game.

 

[Engineer]

While ignoring them, it might be noted that Bush was up by 5% on Gore at this same point in 2000.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Engineer
While ignoring them, it might be noted that Bush was up by 5% on Gore at this same point in 2000.

More than that. On this date in 2000, Gallup had Bush up by 13%.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Engineer
While ignoring them, it might be noted that Bush was up by 5% on Gore at this same point in 2000.

More than that. On this date in 2000, Gallup had Bush up by 13%.

Sorry, should have made myself clear. Zogby had Bush up by 5% at this same point in 2000.

 

[aphex]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: aphex
No offense, but i don't trust any polls.....

The reason? "The telephone poll of 1203 likely voters was conducted from Sunday through Tuesday"

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=909

1203? Im sorry, but IMO that is definately not enough to give a reasonable estimate of how the country will vote.

Never taken a statistics class, eh?


But, yeah, polls are generally to be ignored...esp. this late in the game.

Actually i did, and did fairly well. Gotta lova multiple linear regression! 🙂

Anyway, i still don't agree 🙂

 

[Engineer]

Zogby had Bush up by 2% for the 3 day tracking poll.

Must have been a huge day 3 days ago for Bush as Zogby had Kerry up by 5% the day before yesterday (single day) and had Bush even with Kerry on yesteday's numbers (single day). (Listened to Zogby's daily feature on Reuters)

 

[aphex]

May you should learn how to spell 'Florida' before you head to the polls on tuesday.