Skip to comments.
Electoral College Breakdown 2004, April 14th Update
ECB 2004 ^
| 4/14/04
Posted on 04/14/2004 12:26:56 PM PDT by Dales
Edited on 04/14/2004 5:45:57 PM PDT by Admin Moderator.
[history]
Last week's quiz: What two consecutive elections featured the smallest percentage of states that changed from voting for one party in the first but another party in the second?
Leaving out the Washington elections (I didnt specify, but I meant after the change was made so that the electors were not casting two votes), the first, best answer was given by AuH2ORepublican:
Between 1884 and 1888, only 2 states (NY and IN) switched (both from Democrat Cleveland to Republican B. Harrison), which was only 5.26% of the 38 states then in the Union. If we only looked at elections since 1912 (when there were 48 or more states in the Union), there were 4 sets of consecutive elections in which only 4 states (or 8.33%, since there were 48 states in ech of those cases) switched: 1920-1924 (OK and TN from R to D, KY from D to R, and WI from R to Progressive); 1932-1936 (NH, CT, PA and DE from R to D); 1940-1944 (WI, OH and WY from D to R, and MI from R to D); and 1952-1956 (LA, KY and WV from D to R, and MO from R to D).
Between 1992 and 1996, 5 states (or 10%) switched parties (MT, CO and GA from D to R, and FL and AZ from R to D). So close, but no cigar.
Give that man a cigar.
This week's quiz: Which election featured the first independent media matchup poll, and did it get the election right?
TOPICS: Front Page News; Politics/Elections; US: Florida; US: Louisiana; US: Massachusetts; US: New Jersey; US: New York; US: Oklahoma
KEYWORDS: dales; ecb; ecb2004; electionpresident; poll; polls
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-139 next last
To: KQQL
They don't inspire confidence, that's for sure.
41
posted on
04/14/2004 2:06:18 PM PDT
by
TomEwall
To: codercpc
Does anyone have information to the "keys" of victory for Presidential elections? Allan Lichtman's 13 Keys to the White House. I'm still looking for a good site to describe it.
42
posted on
04/14/2004 2:06:43 PM PDT
by
KarlInOhio
(Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing. - Ann Coulter 4/1/04, How 9-11 Happened)
To: tjwmason
I forgot one other point I wanted to mention. Have any data on spread-betting been produced?
In the U.K. our 1992 election was an utter failure for the opinion pollsters, right up to the election-night exit polls they thought that it was going to be a 'hung parliament' and earlier thought that it would be a clear Labour victory, with newscasters barely hiding their sarcasm when reporting Prime Minister Major saying that the Tories would win.
The spread-betters, by contrast, aggregated out at a small Tory victory about 3 days before polling. Duely the Tories got a 22 seat majority. I would be most interested to see what they are saying about this November.
43
posted on
04/14/2004 2:09:13 PM PDT
by
tjwmason
(A voice from Merry England.)
To: JLS
I was a part of this third until recently. I knew that jobs is a lagging indicator, but until that number came out, I didn't feel too good about this economy. I think there are a lot of people like me who just don't know the jobs situation yet, or who have been distracted by the economy.
44
posted on
04/14/2004 2:09:31 PM PDT
by
TomEwall
To: Dales
In April, 2 FL polls have come out, one a Mason-Dixon poll showing Bush 8% ahead of Kerry, the second a Rasmussen poll that doesn't include Nader and in which Kerry leads by only 1% (2% less than last month's Rasmussen poll). I would have kept FL at slight lean to Bush.
45
posted on
04/14/2004 2:11:36 PM PDT
by
AuH2ORepublican
(Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice, moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.)
To: tjwmason
Reagan just narrowly missed taking all 50 states. Mondale barely hung on to his home state.
The economy doesn't need to "start pulling up" as it has been moving up for quite some time. It just needs to continue as it has been. Ironically the main worry now seems to be that things are going so well that interest rates will start going up again.
I think the big question is what happens in Iraq. I agree with you completely on the importance of the election.
46
posted on
04/14/2004 2:15:09 PM PDT
by
TomEwall
To: AuH2ORepublican
I think he moved it to toss-up because all the other polls showed Kerry ahead, so there's only been on +Bush poll.
47
posted on
04/14/2004 2:16:21 PM PDT
by
TomEwall
To: tjwmason
48
posted on
04/14/2004 2:17:04 PM PDT
by
So Cal Rocket
(If consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, John F. Kerry’s mind must be freaking enormous)
To: codercpc
13 Keys to the White House: Current standings The keys to Election 2004
13 questions. When 5 or fewer are false the incumbent wins, 6 or more and the challenger will win.
He ranked 8 true, 4 false, 1 undecided in 2003. The undecided now moved to true (economy not in recession during election). I have questions about a couple of the falses, but even if I give the author the benefit of the doubt that still only leaves 4 falses.
One other key (There is no significant third-party or independent campaign) might switch to true, but since Nader hurts only Kerry I would have to see the full description of the question instead of just the one sentence version.
Is this the list of questions you were thinking about?
49
posted on
04/14/2004 2:17:15 PM PDT
by
KarlInOhio
(Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing. - Ann Coulter 4/1/04, How 9-11 Happened)
To: bobjam
"In fact, John F Kennedy is the most recent non-Southern Democrat to win a Southern state."
Actually, Hubert Humphrey (from Minnesota) carried Texas in 1968. But JFK was the last non-Southerner to get as much as 45% in any Southern state (including Kentucky and Oklahoma). That's an even more telling sign of how difficult it is for Kerry to carry any Southern state. even Florida, in which less than half the people are really "Southern," will be very difficult for Kerry because he will get swamped in conservative-Democrat North Florida.
50
posted on
04/14/2004 2:34:35 PM PDT
by
AuH2ORepublican
(Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice, moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.)
To: ABG(anybody but Gore); montomike
the networks calling the state for Algore an hour before the polls in the heavily conservative Panhandle closed, The network call was only 10 minutes before the Panhandle closed. The east closed at 7 PM (EST); the Panhandle at 8. The call was at 7:49-7:53. Even Sammons says so (See pages 36-38), though I think Jeff Greenfield's Book, "Oh Waiter, One order of Crow," has the fullest minute-by minute explanation of the VNS catastrophe throughout election night.
To: BohDaThone
"The network call was only 10 minutes before the Panhandle closed."
Yes, but anyone standing on line at 7:00 p.m. CDT could have cast a vote, and many people either didn't bother to show up or left the line. Republican pollsters estimate that it cost Bush around 11,500 votes, while Democrat pollsters estimate it cost Bush 8,000 votes, so Sammon used the 10,000 number. In any event, it would have made the FL election recount proof.
52
posted on
04/14/2004 3:00:35 PM PDT
by
AuH2ORepublican
(Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice, moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.)
To: AuH2ORepublican
Washington
The Elway Poll.
Kerry 46
Bush 41
Nader 2
53
posted on
04/14/2004 3:11:08 PM PDT
by
KQQL
(@)
54
posted on
04/14/2004 3:12:40 PM PDT
by
KQQL
(@)
To: Dales
Bush has made a nice little comeback in Washington, and the race is now fairly competitive.
No Dales, Rasmussen machine are titled towards rats this time, he scared of his failure in 2000.
55
posted on
04/14/2004 3:21:28 PM PDT
by
KQQL
(@)
To: Dales
From the Okie section:"Insider Advantage suggests that Kerry may want to look to Henry as a running mate."
=======================================================
ROFLOL!!!!!! BAWWWHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!
Brad Henry is a walking stiff. He doesn't "do" anything without consulting all the "good ol'goobers" in the State houses...that got him elected. If any state has a history of CROOKED elections...it's Oklahoma. And that is probably the biggest reason Henry won in Oklahoma.
FWIW-
56
posted on
04/14/2004 3:30:55 PM PDT
by
Osage Orange
("Gun Control" isn't about guns. It's about control.)
To: Dales
Nice job.
Throw a Saddam trial into the news mix before and even during the election, and Kerry is toast.
57
posted on
04/14/2004 3:31:11 PM PDT
by
Dog Gone
To: KQQL
I've been wondering about this. The polls do seem to be running that way -- but how do you explain Missouri? (Rasmussen shows a 7 point edge for Bush)
58
posted on
04/14/2004 3:34:00 PM PDT
by
TomEwall
To: Dog Gone
Hey, good idea!
59
posted on
04/14/2004 3:34:34 PM PDT
by
TomEwall
To: KQQL
Thanks for the ping to the Elway Poll, btw. Regarding your comment, that may be the case, but the poll that had Kerry up double digits was a SurveyUSA one.
60
posted on
04/14/2004 3:36:28 PM PDT
by
Dales
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-139 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
I Wouldn't Touch It With a 10 Foot Poll
Unsustainable Contradictions
The best national poll for my money is the Battleground Poll. Produced by a joint effort between Democrat pollster Celinda Lake of Snell, Lake, Perry and Associates, and Republican pollster Ed Goeas of the Tarrance Group, it avoids the partisanship that sometimes can slip into the sampling methods of other polls. The partisanship can come out in the strategic analysis each does for the respective parties, although the spin presented is usually substantive. This year's springtime Battleground Poll, released this week, is excellent as always.
Ms. Lake takes an optimistic look for the Democrats, saying it is difficult to find a precedent for an incumbent with such anemic numbers who has gone on to win re-election. However, Ms. Lakes analysis contains a significant error which is both unusual for her and could possibly have impacted her optimism; she states Consequently, voters are unhappy with the job Bush is doing; fully half now disapprove of his performance in office (50 percent disapprove to 45 percent approve) while in actuality the polling numbers presented show that she has those numbers transposed. Her prescription for Kerry is to minimize or neutralize Bushs dominance on the critical dimension of security and turn the agenda to the economy.
Mr. Goeas starts his analysis by focusing on the partisan divide in America. One side clearly identifies with President Bush as a strong, moral, decisive leader, views Americas economy on the rebound and credits President George W. Bush. The other side sees Bush as an ineffectual leader who has ignored the war on terrorism to pursue a vendetta against Saddam Hussein in Iraq and is largely focused on the economic downturn and job loss. His conclusion is one that I have been asserting for weeks (but am now questioning): This presidential election truly appears to be starting exactly where it left off in November of 2000 In that election, turnout (not polling) was the final determinant of the election!
The poll has some interesting results. The unaided ballot question, which Mr. Goeas points out is one of the strongest predictors of the coming election, yields a 4-point Bush lead. However, when voters are given the names and are queried, if you had to make a choice, the gap closes to a 1 point Kerry lead (Nader is not a factor, scoring a meager 1%). The numbers are as close as can be here too, as both get 41% saying definitely, 1% saying leaning, and the remainder saying probably. Another way of looking at this is that voters who need to be reminded who the candidates are break 2-1 in favor of John Kerry.
The country is decidedly pessimistic. Well over half of all voters (57%) think that the country is off the right track, compared to just 38% who think we are heading in the right direction. Strikingly, most are not ambivalent about this question. Nearly three quarters of those polled feel strongly about their answer to this question, and those who do take the negative view twice as frequently (47% to 26%). With this in mind, it is very surprising that the President is running even with Kerry; one would expect that if that many people think we need to change direction, that the challenger would be winning comfortably, unless the challenger was viewed so negatively that voters would shun him. However, Kerry has a net favorable rating of +13. The current state of the electorate is contradictory.
Is such a disparity sustainable? There always is that possibility; if something is measured a particular way at one point in time, it can certainly be measured that way at another point in time. However, it is unlikely. As people focus more on the election, the contradictions tend to fade away. However, should this status quo be maintained, then Kerry has very little room for growth. A full 93% of those who think the country is on the wrong track support him, which is about as close to unanimity as one can get in a poll. He also would need to retain his two to one advantage among those who are currently so unfocused on the election that they need the candidate names given to them in order to name a preference. Further, if this status quo does somehow remain, then Kerry faces another challenge, for it would mean another election where turnout is everything. The Democrat base, which energizes the get-out-the-vote machine, is significantly to the left of the country and is angry. Howard Dean angry. Al Gore he played upon our fears angry. Moveon.com angry. But the public is not angry; only 10% said they are angered by the state of affairs. The overwhelming sentiment (33%) is that of worry, which is a much weaker emotion at driving turnout, and playing to the angry base is likely to turn off those who do not share that emotion.
Much more likely is that there will be a change, in one of three forms. Either the Bush campaign will manage to drive up Kerrys negatives to where he is not a viable option for the pessimistic (or Kerry does so himself with some unbelievable gaffes), or people will decide that things are not going so bad after all, or Kerry will pull away.
Of these three possibilities, the least likely to happen is that voters will become so disdainful of Kerry that they would ignore their dour outlook of the nations outlook and vote for the President. Even should there be a 20 point swing in Kerrys net approval rating, it still would unlikely be enough to overcome a 19 point gap in voter optimism, especially when the pessimistic feel so strongly about it. In all likelihood, this probably played into the calculation by the Bush campaign when they decided to decrease current advertising levels by 30%.
There is reason for the Bush campaign to feel optimistic about changing peoples views of the direction of the country. Merely 8% of those polled think they will be worse off financially a year from now. And on matters of national security, terrorism, and Iraq, Bush enjoys substantial leads over Kerry. Again there is a contradiction; people feel we are moving in the wrong direction, but do not think they will be worse of economically and think that Bushs plans on foreign affairs and terror are right. It is possible that this dichotomy will remain, but much more likely that people will change one of these views.
Further, it is very unlikely that the current disconnect over the state of the economy is going to continue. Either the economy is improving, or it is not. If it is improving, then there will be many months worth of evidence to back up that perception, and fewer will believe we are on the wrong path. This would be a disaster for the Kerry campaign, which they clearly realize as indicated by their attempt to redefine the Misery Index, including in it components that cannot be changed by November. It is a valiant effort, but if the economy is truly improving, efforts to portray it as not improving will be fruitless. And if the economy sputters, then the President is in serious trouble.
Iraq is also going to be clarified by November. Bush has a timeline out which will either be made, or it will not. Things will have deteriorated as some fear will happen, or they will not have. There will be spin, and there will be some ambiguity, but by and large the direction will be more readily discernable than it is right now.
Which will it be? Will the delicate status quo, unbalanced and contradictory as it is, hold through November? Will things be better than they are now? Or worse? The quandary for Kerry is that he likely loses the first two cases. If things remain the same, he has to maintain his near-unanimous hammerlock on those who think the country is on the wrong track while simultaneously exciting the angry left base (for turnout) without alienating those who are worried, not angry, and who generally like the President as a person. And if things are better, the pool of those who think the country is heading in the wrong direction will not be large enough. His entire election hinges on the coming events of the next several months validating the pessimists view that the country is heading in the wrong direction. He has the unenviable task of having to hope for misery and for death.
For the past few weeks, I have been stating that I believed this election would play out much as 2000s did. I no longer have that opinion, and am back to the stance I had at the start of the year. Things are close now, but are unlikely to remain that way. The contradictions that exist within the opinions of the electorate will be resolved, and the underlying issues that right now are so unclear (such as if the economy is recovering, and which way things will go in Iraq) will have clarified. The popular vote will probably never open up all that much due to the partisan divide of the country, but the bet here is that most of the battleground states, and possibly some others, will move together to one candidate. And since I believe that the rainy outlook on the economy is based on false beliefs-- fully a third of voters think we are currently in a recession according to a recent Rasmussen poll, when in reality we have been out of a recession for many months)the money here says that by October it will be clear that President Bush will be re-elected.
This Week's Polling Updates Overview
For most of the week, it appeared as if the pollsters had decided to go on spring break, as no state polls came out until Sunday. We ended up getting a few, with the majority just reinforcing what we already knew. The biggest surprise was, ironically, just such a case, where New Jersey validated previous results showing that to be a horse race. New York opened back up for Kerry, but the gap is still about 15 points less than it was in 2000, which again validates the New Jersey result (since Gore won the Garden State by 16).Just before publication, Rasmussen released a new result for Florida, showing it to be neck and neck.
Background: Republicans have won every election here since LBJ.
Polling Data:
Punditry: Much to my surprise, Oklahoma is still relatively competitive for a southern state. The Insider Advantage poll may have an explanation: Governor Brad Henry's approval ratings are through the roof. Insider Advantage suggests that Kerry may want to look to Henry as a running mate. I think that would likely cause Henry's approval ratings to plummet, since he has been able to avoid many of the positions of the national Democratic party so far. Strong Advantage for Bush.
Background: They like them liberal in Massachusetts. Reagan did carry the state twice (barely), and Ike took it twice, but that's about it since 1924. Most of the time it has not been very close at all.
Polling Data:
Punditry: They love Kerry in Massachusetts. Safe for Kerry.
Background: Louisiana votes for southerners in Presidential elections. George Wallace won here. Carter beat Ford. Clinton beat Dole. And Clinton beat Bush (with a big help from Perot). All others since JFK were won by Republicans.
Polling Data:
Punditry: Even after the Kerry surge, Louisiana is sitting pretty for President Bush. One bright spot for the Democrats is that Jindal was leading Blanco by almost as impressive margins just a few weeks before losing the election to the current Governor. One thing to keep an eye on is the retirement of popular Senator John Breaux, who is looking to move into the private sector. Should there be a Kerry/Breaux ticket, then Louisiana may end up being not so comfortable.Strong Advantage for Bush.
Background: New Jersey used to be considered a Republican state. Those days have passed, although there are still some signs of life. In the last 10 Presidential elections it has gone 1-6-3 with the Republican wins coming in the middle, the last Clinton win and the Gore win were by such substantial margins that it is hard to avoid the feeling that New Jersey is trending leftward.
If New Jersey remains tight enough to stay in the battleground, it is a case of back to the future. ECB2000 started with it leaning Gore's way. The Democrats have 7 of 13 Representatives and both Senate seats, control both chambers of the state legislature, hold all of the important executive offices, and have a 25%-19% advantage in voter registration.
Polling Data:
Punditry: Can we finally stop telling me how nuts I am to think that New Jersey is competitive? It is. Slight Advantage for Bush.
Now if it will be by election day is anyone's guess. But the decision to hold the convention in nearby New York City doesn't seem so nutty any longer, does it?
Background: From 1960 onward, Republicans have carried the Empire State only three times. Nixon beat McGovern, Reagan beat Carter, and Reagan beat Mondale. Even Dukakis won here.
Polling Data:
Punditry: In March, I said "I fully expect the Empire State to move strongly to the left in the next poll for the state." I am originally from New York. I know my home state.
The most interesting thing to me about this poll is how unbelievably popular in New York Mayor Giuliani is. Sen. Chuck Schumer enjoys a 61-19 approval/disapproval rating split, indicative of a very popular politician. However, when he is matched up against Rudy? Mayor Giuliani beats Sen. Schumer 56 -- 36 percent.
Background: Despite the best efforts of the results-oriented Florida Supreme Court, Bush held on to win the state in 2000, just as every recount conducted afterwards validated. Did you know that since 1948, though, that only three times has Florida gone for the Democrat candidate? Johnson got 51%, Carter got 52%, and Clinton (2nd term) got 48% (with Perot taking 9%). More times than not, the Republican has come closer to 60%. Why Bush underperformed here to such a degree is something his campaign must rectify.
In the first ECB of 2000, Florida was listed as a battleground with a slight advantage to Gore. This time around, it is starting with a slight advantage for Bush. Florida has 6 Democrat Representatives and 18 Republicans. Both chambers of the state legislature are controlled by the Republicans. Republicans control most of the executive branch. However, both Senate seats are held by Democrats. As of Dec. 1, 2003, the state registration was 41.9% Democrat and 38.6% Republican.
Polling Data:
Punditry: Rasmussen says Florida will be 2000 redux. Seems fitting at this stage of the game. Tossup.
K53-B44
3/11/04
B47-K46
3/24/04
B46-K40
3/29/04
B52-UD36
7/28/03
HD50-B38
10/2/03
K51-B41
3/23/04
B46-K45
4/1/04
B49-K45
3/31/04
B48-WC33
12/3/03
B49-UD29
12/22/03
K53-B31
2/7/04
K51-B38
3/4/04
K48-B43
3/24/04
B46-K45
4/2/04
B48-K43
4/1/04
B47-UD43
2/4/04
B50-UD39
2/5/04
K54-B32
4/5/04
K47-B39
3/13/04
K50-B38
4/2/04
K47-B46
4/13/04
B48-K44
4/10/04
B51-K43
3/11/04
B57-K41
2/16/04
K52-B33
3/28/04
K51-B41
4/4/04
B47-K45
4/7/04
B49-K38
3/17/04
B57-K39
3/4/04
B52-UD27
5/16/03
K49-B35
4/12/04
K46-B41
4/5/04
B51-K42
3/18/04
B52-K37
3/24/04
B54-K35
3/6/04
B52-K41
3/22/04
B47-K35
4/04
B55-K23
3/17/04
B49-K42
3/23/04
B52-K38
3/28/04
B59-K27
3/18/04
B49-K40
4/3/04
B66-K24
3/25/04
Discuss ECB2004 On Free Republic