Election 2004 Presidential Ballot (Bush 49% Kerry 43%)

Rasmussen ^ | 2/20/2004 | RepublicanWizard

[republicanwizard]

Two new polls which should cheer us all!

[Lunatic Fringe]

We're not going to get into a trend where polls are breaking news, are we? Didnt we go through this in 2000?

Perhaps we can create a new sidebar for Presidential poll releases? That might be a good idea...

[Gunslingr3]

National polls are useless for anything but cheerleading headlines for the horse race. This is a State by State race.

[Always Right]

Still meaningless. Until the campaign begins and people discover who the Democratic candidate is, the polls are meaningless. All the polls are showing now is the favorability of Bush, since any unknown Democrat would run just as well as Kerry is. When Kerry's negatives come out and the public is aware just how liberal he is, then the polls will have more meaning.

[republicanwizard]

No I would not make this a rule. However this poll is important since it shows Bush with an expanding lead over Kerry. Obviously there is movement in the race, and that is "breaking news."

[Rokke]

As a pre-emptive post.... Yes, Rasmussen was off in his final 2000 Presidential poll, but his polling methods have been adjusted and he's been very accurate this year polling the primaries.

[republicanwizard]

Kerry has gotten 0% negative treatment from the press. Any Bush lead is incredible in that context.

[republicanwizard]

I disagree. Polling data from individual states reveals a correlation between national polling data. A national tie gives Bush a 17 point lead in Kentucky and Kerry a slight lead in Michigan. So if Bush is ahead marginally, then he is probably tied in Pennsylvania and comfortably ahead in Florida.

[xzins]

Yes. I wish we were into the state polls already, but it appears that the expense doesn't allow until we get to about 4 mos before.

UNLESS: does anyone know of any state-by-state tracking polls?

If we took New York and California out of the stats, what would the nation look like?

[republicanwizard]

Johnny,

I'll be gone for an hour. Can you take over for me?

Joe

[JohnnyZ]

Yes, Rasmussen was off in his final 2000 Presidential poll, but his polling methods have been adjusted and he's been very accurate this year polling the primaries.

It's hard to see how he could ever compare with John "Bush & Gore Tied In California" Zogby.

[republicanwizard]

Take them and Illinois out of the unemployment numbers, and I'd be laughing my head off.

[JohnnyZ]

It's like I'm psychic.

[cpdiii]

President Bush has endured 6 months of no stop pounding from the Democrats in their Primarys. There has been virtually no response from Bush because to spend money at this point when the Dems are getting free time to bash the President via the televised debates and sound bites would not be effective. Once it is 100% sure that Kerry is the Nominee Karl Rove will "unless the dogs of war" political war that is.

If Bush is at 50% today after what the Dems have thrown at him, he is in great shape.

[republicanwizard]

Not getting any argument here.

[Constitutionalist Conservative]

Obviously Gallup seems to be the outlier outright liar here

[cyncooper]

More numbers.

[RetiredArmy]

Maybe the dems should just run this "unknown" person against Bush and after Unknown wins, then appoint who they want. Unknown does better than all their other people! Ha!

[Always Right]

Kerry has gotten 0% negative treatment from the press. Any Bush lead is incredible in that context.

Absolutely. Besides Republicans and Moderates haven't even started to evaluate the candidates. Most Democrats aren't even paying that close of attention. These polls are based purely on people seeing Kerry's picture on magazine covers and all the negatives Bush has been hit with. I would bet 10% of the population has no idea that Kerry considered Vietnam vets war criminals, or that Kerry opposes partial birth abortions, or that Kerry voted against the Gulf War.....when the people learn just how far left Kerry is, all bets are off. Right now people view Kerry in the context of their ideal candidate. Let's wait till they see his warts and Kerry has plenty.

[Tallguy]

As always, the problem with polling is that each of the polsters deals with the problem of "No Response" differently by fudging their numbers. Everyone admits that you are more likely to get a "No Response" from a Republican than from a Democrat, but it's a hard thing to discount for. No 2 polsters seemingly have the same technique for dealing with this problem.