Posted on 06/11/2004 1:42:35 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
MAKING SENSE OF THE TIMES: New LA Times poll out this morning showing Kerry opening up a 7-point lead on Bush nationally. Not too surprising, really, given the source.
What is a bit surprising, however, is that the move toward Kerry comes despite a 51% job approval rating for President Bush, which is unchanged since the last LAT poll in March which had Kerry up three points.
The Times' says Bush's approval rating remains strong "partly because of his continuing strength on the terrorism issue and partly because of his virtually unanimous support from Republicans and independents who consider themselves conservative."
But this analysis seems to suggest a trend that's almost exactly opposite from what we've seen in other polls, namely, that Republicans and Independents have softened a bit on Bush's job approval rating but still support him as their choice over Kerry. Hence Bush has remained close in the horse race with Kerry despite job approval ratings dipping into the mid-to-low forties.
The LAT poll causes more head-sratching when you look at their state results, which are starkly at odds with other recent data.
Bush with an eleven point lead in Missouri? Not a chance. Even the biggest Bush booster in the country wouldn't claim that the President would win the Show-Me State by double digits as things stand right now. The latest polls show Bush has, at best, a tiny lead over Kerry.
In Ohio, three consecutive polls conducted during the last three weeks - including a Mason-Dixon one with a pretty big sample - show Bush with a small lead, but the LA Times has Kerry up by three.
Likewise, the last three polls in Wisconsin - albeit two from Zogby's online operation and one by a Dem firm - have Kerry ahead by sizeable margins. The LA Times has Bush up two. I suppose it's possible Bush has a small lead in Wisconsin, but not likely. With only two exceptions over the past three months (both Badger polls which I've been told over samples Republicans, by the way) the state has been leaning toward Kerry.
Finally, just from a common sense standpoint the LA Times state data is at odds with its own national results. If John Kerry really is leading by 6 or 7 points nationally then there is simply no way Bush is winning Missouri by 11 and Wisconsin by 2.
The LA Times poll does confirm one major trend: Bush continues to get poor ratings on his ability to handle the economy (43% in the Times poll), despite the fact the economy is doing quite well by almost every indication. Jonathan Weisman examines this issue in more detail in today's Washington Post.
There is still plenty of time for good economic news to seep in to voters' minds between now and the election, but it's looking more and more as if no matter how much the economy improves, the theme this November will be "it's Iraq, stupid."- T. Bevan 8:05am
Ping...
The thing that amused me about the poll, is it showed Nader taking as many votes from Bush as Kerry.
Sure...
Another indication they over-sampled Dems.
That's true, they oversampled Democrats. Their own state by state data can't be reconciled with their national poll results. The LAT forgets the fact that in presidential elections, the key is not the popular vote but the vote in the Electoral College that elects the President. You can have a majority in the EC and it doesn't matter if you have less than 51% of the vote. Bill Clinton won in 1996 with 49% and G.W Bush won in 2000 with 48%.
Bingo.
What should worry the Kerry camp is that this poll, though skewed in his favor, pegs Bush's job approval rate at 51 percent.
The President should worry if that number slides under 50%. That's the key to this year's election.
If Nader were to drop out that would be really bad news...
All poll data is meaningless until Americans get a good, close-up look at Kerry. Right now, he's still "the guy who isn't Bush" in most minds. I'm from Massachusetts, and I can tell you John Kerry is one of the most unappealing guys to run for office. Forget his politics or his convictions -- personally, he's eminently dislikable. That loses elections in this country more than any other factor.
Figures don't lie - any liar can figure.
LA Slimes polls are not worth the paper they're printed in.
No poll is worth anything at this time.
SHHHHHH
Don't tell the RATS, let them think their man is going to win.
sKerry WILL self-destruct, GUARANTEED! ! ! !
The one good thing about this poll is that lulls the Left into complancy. As for us, no matter what polls show, we need to work like we're 10 points behind till November.
Very true. But I think it could all be over for the Poodle if Bush really does well later today.
I've said it for a day or two now but I think it bears repeating here: President Bush has a once in a lifetime opportunity to tell Americans how he would carry forward the Reagan legacy into a second term. That's what been missing from the President's campaign and its hurt him. The President has to tell the country what Ronal Reagan the man as well as the President means to him and to the country. He rightly called President Reagan a "national treasure" upon appearing at the Capitol Rotunda last night. Today, he has to expand on that adjective.
I don't mean it has to be an explicitly political speech - that would backfire and it would be in poor taste. We want to be careful not to do what the Democrats' did at the Wellstone memorial and desecrate a tribute to a great man. What I meant is its okay for the President to evoke a philosophy that President Reagan held and explain it to the American people. He doesn't have to get partisan to do that. The President should explain what Reagan's view of America and its government means to him and to the American people. In no way should this be a rally for the President's re-election campaign. The Democrats are going to see any explication of Reagan's beliefs and values as political in an election year. Let them; the man and the President cannot be appreciated without the vision that guided his stewardship of the American Ship Of State during the two terms he was President. This is what I mean by President Bush setting the stage for a second term - by making people understand the TRUTH about who Reagan was and what he did with his life.
"What's surprising is Kerry's tying the President in New Hampshire. "
why is this surprising?
Kerry has name recognition up here plus NH voted for Clinton twice and nearly voted for Gore.
Currently we have an R gov, two R Senators and 2 R congressman with Rs overwhelmingly in control of the house and Senate.
It truly is a swing state despite its conservatism. Once NH knows Kerry will raise taxes i am hoping that They will rally to Bush.
Also the fact that they are tied is a bonus since Kerry was leading Bush by nearly 12 points up here at one point :)
Thanks you my friend. The LA Times STINKS, and has for many years.
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.