Posted on 09/04/2004 10:43:07 AM PDT by Nascardude
Thanks, Just asking. I'm still suspicious about these techniques. I would think that in the information age more accuracy could be obtain, without incurring that much extra cost on the back end and the additional cost on the front end would be a worthwhile investment. But it's not my line of work so I guess I'll just have to accept it. LOL
Is it possible that more people responding to the poll said they were Republican because they were more likely to vote for Bush? In other words, as Bush's actual numbers go up, wouldn't you expect more people to say that they are Republican when being polled?
Consider this the Laura vs. Tahraisa effect...
We know Italy has stood with us...and we admire the brave Italian people. We were all full of sorrow for your losses. Thank you! God Bless you.
Just wonder if Larry Sabato feel like an &$$ now for saying such a stupid remark as "He (Bush) really will need a miracle to win, and the last miracle was for Harry S. Truman," Sabato said in an interview...
Sigh!!!
Yeah, Larry'll never live that down.......total nonsense.
Chris Shays? HA! This a-hole wouldn't even vote for the Rapists impeachment!
Once you get off of your 'convention high' you'll see things more clearly.
Bush/Cheney - 50%
Skerry/BreckGirlSilkPony - 43%
Still a nice bump, but not the amount being reported by Newsweek.
The Newsweek figures are valid if you assume a huge GOP turnout. The Democrats turned out in 2000 because they had a feeling Algore had it in the bag. You don't get the sense they really love The Lurch. Let's hope their turnout stays deeply depressed on Election Day.
I don't know, they have NJ listed as Democratic, but technically we might be a purple/swing state after the McGreevey fiasco. Jay Leno said the terror alert went to lavendar after that. Okay, well better said, we must be classified as a democratic/swing purple state. That would be best. Definitely purple.
Then the Time poll is als BS right? Look Rassmusen has GW up by 4 today. That number reflects only 1/3 of those that have seen Bush's speech. In this(newsweek) poll those that saw GW's speech the "bounce was even greater, IN FACT the sample prior to GW's speech was only about a 5 point bounce. Now if by tomorrow when 2 out of three of the rolling samples include Bush's speech then GW should be up about 6 to 8 points and by Monday when the polling sample is truly post convention then GW may very well be up by 10 in the Rassmisan poll. I have a strong feeling that Bush really connected with his speech and both the Time and Newsweek polls are more accurate than you may think. I will wait to see Rassmusans poll tomorrow before popping the "bounce" cork.
Carter was not and is not a "decent, normal guy." He is a committed anti-American who has illegally meddled in American foreign policy since his presidency was rightly repudiated, and has consistently taken actions contrary to the best interest of the U.S. in an effort to burnish his image.
Dukakis, while a pathetic loser, might actually be a decent guy.
Man, I hope you're right... Keep in mind the power of the media... Although not as influential as 4 years ago, they've become much more brazen (see 60 Minutes from the CBS slimeballs) in their support of the War Criminal.
Time isn't as far as I know, though I have not seen the sampling for that poll.
I do believe Bush got a bigger bounce than most predicted.
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.