To: LS
I've been around, and we have hit established pollsters plenty. Just not every single time a new poll thread is posted.
I was also highly suspicisious of Rasmussen until he caught Edward's sudden surge - right before his strong second place showing in WI. No other pollster caught this.
Anyway, a tracking poll is most interesting for its trends since the same polling methods (whether flawed or valid) are used night after night. I
25 posted on
02/25/2004 11:00:06 AM PST by
ambrose
("John Kerry has blood of American soldiers on his hands" - Lt. Col. Oliver North)
To: ambrose
People often overlook two things: 1) Taking the word of just one pollster as Gospel - no matter who the pollster - is just not very smart. 2) National tracking polls in a Presidential race are interesting, and give a good indication of the national voting totals, but have next-to-nothing to do with the electoral college.
A variety of polls (Zogby, POA, WSJ, etc.) showed a very close national race in 2000. That's what we got. National totals: Al Gore - 48.4%: George Bush - 47.9%.
29 posted on
02/25/2004 11:13:22 AM PST by
Coop
("Hero" is the last four-letter word I'd use to describe John Kerry.)
To: ambrose
Getting Edwards right in one poll is hardly a reason for celebrating Ras. However, I'm open. I hope he's right, because he consistently has Bush/GOP higher than most other pollsters.
42 posted on
02/25/2004 12:04:56 PM PST by
LS
(CNN is the Amtrack of news.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson