|
Interests, |
 |
Pay Me Off. |
Posted on 01/24/2004 4:09:50 PM PST by Timesink
kausfiles
If none of Kerry's opponents makes a good negative ad against him based on the information in this Jonathan Cohn article, then the Iowans will have won! ... On the stump this week, Kerry portentously attacked special interests and complained that retirement accounts have been "decimated" by the "scandals of Enron and Worldcom," but Cohn makes it clear that an overbroad law that Kerry supported limiting the ability of investors to sue over fraudulent accounting practices contributed to the Enron and Worldcom scandals. The law was backed by a variety of monied special interests and was passed over President Clinton's veto. ... You think there is enough hypocrisy there to work with? ... 3:41 P.M.
Blogger Chris Huttman says he's figured out what the daily numbers in the ARG New Hampshire tracking poll are. (ARG only reports a rolling three-day average.) He displays his results in a chart, which shows Edwards and Clark tied for second at 16, and Kerry ahead at 39. I don't vouch for Huttman's calculations, and the photo on his site lacks a certain confidence-inspiring gravitas. Still ... You make the call! ... P.S.: Huttman's chart doesn't show the one-day rebound for Dean that Zogby does. So who are you going to believe--Zogby or this kid? ... I'm thinking! ... P.P.S.: Yes, yes, I know. A single day in a three-day tracking poll usually has very high sampling error--and even ARG's three-day poll doesn't have such a great track record. But if Zogby can tease his final-day numbers, Huttman can post ARG's. ... 10:10 A.M.
Hare Rama, Hare Rama ... The New Republic's Ryan Lizza joins the Edwards Surge Watch, noticing that Edwards' support in at least some polls is "stickier," meaning that more of his supporters say they are "strong" supporters. Combine this with Edwards' lead for "second choice" (in the WMUR poll) and you have the following dynamic:
So not only are Edwards' voters more loyal to him than his oppoents' voters are to them, but when his oppoents' wishy-washy supporters start to abandon them, they are most likely to shift into the Edwards' camp ...
2:00 A.M.
Clark v. Edwards: Greg Abbott says it's wrong to suggest (as John Ellis does) that it makes no sense for Clark to be behind the negative info (e.g. see Drudge) being spread about Edwards. Knocking Edwards down quickly somehow is Clark's only hope, Abbott argues--Clark has to turn it into a "Kerry vs. Clark" race and this has to happen "in time to be the story for South Carolina" on Feb. 3. Grim! Time to empty the ammo belt. ... 1:45 A.M.
Krishna Krishna, Hare Hare ... Attention, Zogby Crack addicts: WaPo's Morin and Deane contribute a highly useful explanation of why it's dangerous to bank on New Hampshire tracking polls. I'll let the Mystery Pollster blog it:
They hit two timely and important topics:
1) The poor history of NH tracking surveys in predicting the final result, especially in 2000 [when ARG had Bush 2 points ahead, only to see McCain win by 18-ed]
2) Why real pollsters distrust Zogby. The money quote from Warren Mitofsky: "Zogby is not a reputable pollster...He is more a salesman and a self-promoter than a pollster. He has made lots of mistakes on election outcomes -- five in 2002." [Meow!-ed] ...
I think the most important caution for observers this time around: New Hampshire has a history of very rapid change in the last 24 hours or so that tracking polls miss. My memory of 1984 was that the final Monday night tracking poll had Hart and Mondale running dead even. As you'll recall, Hart did a bit better than that.
Hart won by more than 9 points. ... I highlight the possibility of final-day change not because I think Kerry is in a Mondale-like position. I don't. But I also think it's not not not too late for an Edwards surge that gives him a surprisingly strong second place finish. ... 12:39 P.M.
Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna ... The Mystery Pollster has been examining the N.H. surveys carefully also and senses the same possibility I do. His latest email:
Watch the "internals" in the public polls, especially favorable ratings and second choice. These tend to move ahead of the vote preference, and may be a better indicator of trends that won't start to move the vote choice until the last 24-48 hours. For example, note the following in the just released Globe/WBZ TV track.
-- Yes, Kerry now has a big lead and an enormous favorable rating (76%), but...
-- Edward's favorable rating has jumped 9 percentage points this week (51% to 59%) and is now second only to Kerry's.
-- Meanwhile the favorable ratings of Dean and Clark fell sharply and steadily all week long (down 18 and 14 points respectively).
-- Dean and Clark have also seen their vote totals drop this week (both now at 15%), so that they are now in a statistical tie with Edwards (at 12%).
-- Meanwhile, undecideds have been rising -- not the usual pattern as election day approaches.
If Dean and Clark each fall a few more points, the conditions certainly exist for Edwards to move a few (statistically insignificant) points ahead in the next 48 hours. If that happens, I'd expect another overheated shift in the coverage ("Edwards surges into second place!!). And if that happens. ..
12:06 A.M.
'Night is Young' Update: The WMUR tracking poll story, which summarizes a survey that ended Thursday, has this finding:
If voters do decide to change their minds, the most popular second-choice candidate is Edwards, with 22 percent labeling him their backup. Kerry was next with 20 percent.
Is that the tinkling of Hare Krishna bells I hear approaching in the distance? ... 8:12 P.M.
LaRouchies 1, Clark 0? I went to hear Wesley Clark speak at a rally in Derry, New Hampshire, getting lost (there was some sort of river in the way) and arriving 45 minutes late. This was OK, because Clark was 80 minutes late. ... The very large crowd (about 650 people) waited patiently while two of Clark's West Point classmates stalled for time until he arrived ... My Clark expectations had been raised by my colleague Jacob Weisberg, who wrote earlier this week that Clark is much improved. I'm sure that's true, and I'm sure Clark's a brilliant man, but his stump speech didn't show much of this brilliance. Clark seemed like a man who had been told these are the fifteen things you have to say to appeal to Democratic primary voters, and he proceeded to say them. Always say "George W. Bush," with a sneer? Check. Cheap Halliburton reference? Check. Affirmative action? Check. Nothing new here.... I can't say Clark doesn't believe all these things, but I can't quite believe he does, and I certainly don't think they were the 15 things he most strongly feels need saying. .... None of the General's presumably formidable intelligence seemed to have been applied in any sort of critical way to the by-the-book liberal policies he recited. And in some cases, I'd argue, he even picked dumb versions of the dogma. The "fortunate" helping the "less fortunate"--"that's what our party stands for," he said. Isn't that what Bush's "compassion" and charity stands for? I'd argue Democrats stand for a government of self-respecting citizens acting to ensure that no self-respecting citizen needs that kind of "help." And I bet if a Clark consultant told him to say that, he would!... Maybe he gets better when he answers questions--but I didn't find out because Clark didn't take questions. Apparently, the normal Q & A session was cancelled because LaRouchies were spotted in the audience. If they can shut down big political meetings, then the LaRouchies will have won, no? ... P.S.: Clark's posture is sort of hunch-shouldered and Uriah Heepish, which doesn't help. ...7:22 P.M.
If Dean bounces back a bit from his post-Iowa slide and comes in second in N.H., does he get to call himself the "Comeback Kid"? That's what Bill Clinton did in 1992, remember, while losing to Paul Tsongas by a substantial 8 percentage points--and Clinton got away with it.[This excellent point was stolen from Jon Keller of WBZ, whom I heard in the car on the way back to my motel.] All Dean has to do is smile, work up some energy, and give a rousing prime time victo ... well, maybe he could skip the rousing victory speech part. ... 7:56 P.M.
John Ellis has three or four excellent posts up, one of which asks:
Is it really possible that the good citizens of New Hampshire will go through the last week of a presidential primary campaign with no negative ads on TV? What a bummer! Where's the fun in that?
He also thinks Edwards blew his "NH or SC?" decision. I say (as always) the night is young. 3:22 P.M.
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.msn.com ...
|
Interests, |
|
Pay Me Off. |
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.