New Battleground Poll: Kerry 49%, Bush 48%

ABC News ^ | April 14, 2004 | Associated Press

[Bonaventure]

President Bush appears vulnerable on several fronts, including support for whether he deserves re-election and worries about the country's direction, but Democratic rival John Kerry has been unable to capitalize on those weaknesses, a bipartisan poll suggests. The result six months before the Nov. 2 presidential election is a tight race between a vulnerable incumbent and a challenger who has not yet defined himself, according to the Battleground 2004 poll released Wednesday. The survey was conducted by Republican pollster Ed Goeas and Democratic pollster Celinda Lake.

Bush and Kerry were virtually tied in the survey, with Kerry at 49 percent support and Bush at 48 percent.

The poll found Bush retains an advantage on personal qualities like strong leadership, and on such issues as his handling of the campaign against terrorism and the war in Iraq. Kerry holds a slight edge on such qualities as compassion, and leads Bush on handling the economy and health care.

Both have similar favorable ratings, with slightly more than half of voters viewing each favorably.

But on the intensity of those feelings, Bush has the advantage, with 38 percent saying they feel strongly for Bush and 26 percent saying the same about Kerry.

That intensity of feeling helps Bush stay close to Kerry despite mixed feelings about his re-election and Kerry's advantage on the economy, health care and Social Security.

"With advantages like this, we should be way ahead," Lake said. "How do we translate Kerry's issue advantages into a lead against Bush?"

[Bonaventure]

These numbers aren't that bad for the president, although the article cautions that the survey was completed before recent turmoil in Iraq.

[1Old Pro]

If Kerry isn't ahead by at least 10-15 points right now he has no chance. This poll is very bad news for Kerry

[Bonaventure]

I'm not really a connoisseur of polls, but I seem to remember reading that Battleground is the gold standard in presidential polling.

Lake's frustration is telling. The issues probably break about as strongly for Kerry now as they ever will -- the economy will likely turn into a net positive for Bush before November -- and still he can't gain much traction.

[MrB]

I have a hilarious, and scary scenario.

Imagine the leftists' screams of agony if Bush again wins the EC without winning the popular vote.

I tend to think that more than a few of them will get violent after their loss this fall, regardless of the spread.

[irish guard]

Obviously Goeas and Lake felt it was not necessary to include Nader in the mix, since the two total 97% and there was no mention of Nader. In a tight race like this one, like it or not, the Nader vote is important to poll. These two are pros, I'm not sure why they didn't include Nader. Anybody's thoughts as to why?

[Owen]

>
I tend to think that more than a few of them will get violent after their loss this fall, regardless of the spread.
>

Such violence from their extremists should be encouraged. They are unarmed and will accomplish nothing beyond getting themselves convicted of a felony and losing the right to vote.

[Bonaventure]

Nader's absence is baffling. Perhaps Goeas and Lake are convinced he'll be out of the race by November or will be a non-factor.

I'm inclined to think Nader will not influence the results this time around. I suspect Bush will win by a healthy margin -- a margin greater than Nader's vote share. If, by contrast, Bush loses, it'll be because things really went south on him, and if that happens, Kerry will probably win big. I don't expect a squeaker.

[irish guard]

By the way, I had asked this before and don't have any way of obtaining this info, perhaps Dales does. I know it is common for the challenger to be ahead in the "springtime" of campaigns.

Does anybody know where Carter in 1980, Reagan in 1984, Bush 1 in 1992 and Clinton in 1996 stood each month leading into the Fall campaign?

It would be interesting to see a side by side comparison (month to month) from March through the conventions.

I know.....I know, I should be willing to do the work on this and will begin an internet search, but was hoping someone might have the history on this. Perhaps we are all too worried about the polls right now and perhaps not.

[finnman69]

http://tarrance.com/battleground.html

If you go to the breakdown, BUSH is up 43-39-1 with 15% undecided


“Answer Unclear, Ask Again Later”

Like the classic Magic 8-Ball toy that would occasionally give the frustrating response “answer unclear, ask again later,” traditional measures of public opinion that have been predictive of which party will win the Presidency are split.

In modern day presidential politics every incumbent president who had a job approval ranking of fifty percent (50%) or better at this point of the reelection campaign went on to win reelection in November. President Bush’s approval from the American electorate in this latest Battleground Poll stands at 50%.

Another measurement that has been very predictive in past Presidential elections is which presidential candidate “would do a better job keeping America prosperous.” The Democrats have never taken the White House unless they had a lead of seven-points or
better on that measurement. John Kerry’s lead on the measurement of keeping America prosperous stands at seven-points.

One last measurement that is highly predictive of where the race stands is the “unaided ballot.” At the very beginning of the survey, voters are asked to volunteer which Presidential candidate they are voting for in the upcoming election. No information is provided – voters must name from memory the candidate they plan to support. No previous questions have influenced the responses.

In November 2000, N=504 interviews were conducted the night before the Presidential election. In that survey Bush held an extremely narrow lead on the “unaided ballot” –
Bush 41.2%, Gore 39.5%, Nader 1.7%, Buchanan/other 1.2% – a lead of 1.7% and well within the margin of error. In the latest Battleground Poll (N=1000) the “unaided ballot”
results are very similar – Bush 42.9%, Kerry 39.4%, Nader 1.1%, and other 1.3% – a lead of 3.5% and slightly above the margin of error.

This presidential election truly appears to be starting exactly where it left off in November of 2000 – with all the intensity of the final days of a campaign. In that
election, turnout (not polling) was the final determinant of the election! In this latest Battleground Poll for the 2004 presidential election, every indication points to another extremely close election.

[finnman69]

http://www.tarrance.com/pdf/GOPAnalysis.pdf

[HostileTerritory]

Nader will not be on the ballot in all 50 states because he is not working through the Green Party this year. It's uncertain how many states he will be eligible to run in.

[LS]

Is Nader included? If not, take 3% off Kerry's #s.

[Bonaventure]

Rasmussen's new numbers are up: Kerry 47%, Bush 45%. He will release a new Florida poll today at 3:00 p.m. EDT.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Presidential_Tracking_Poll.htm

[hchutch]

I agree. The problem is, will there be much of a shift by November 2 in a polarized country?

[ambrose]

RealClearPolitics.com reports:

New BattleGround Poll: Kerry Up 1 Head-to-Head vs Bush, Down 4 to Bush in 3-Way Race

Perhaps the media is not reporting the Nader number?

[Dales]

Depends on the polling company. I'll use Gallup since I have it handy.

Carter led Reagan until mid-June, fell behind, retook the lead in September and lost it in the last week.

Reagan led Mondale the whole way according to Gallup (although the AP had Mondale up for 1 poll around the Democrat convention). GHW Bush led Clinton until July and then trailed the rest of the way. Clinton led Dole the entire way.