THIS is the poll we'll all hear about.
I don't understand their numbers, they sure don't change much even as all the rest change drastically.
Edwards DOB: 10 Jun 53
Cheney DOB : 31 Jan 40
In 1973, the draft ended and the U.S. converted to
an All-Volunteer military.
Edwards turned 18 in 1971.
John Edwards COULD have served during Vietnam BUT didn't.
Instead he went to college from '70-'74
He enrolled at Clemson University
but dropped out in his first year,
after a football scholarship fell through
"...A proud product of public schools, John became the first person in his family to attend college.
He worked his way through North Carolina State University where he graduated with high honors in 1974,
and then earned a law degree with honors in 1977 from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. .."
http://www.johnedwards2004.com/john_edwards.asp
"I will not have my commitment to defending this country questioned
by those who refused to serve when they had had a chance"
Kerry at a campaign stop in Ohio on 09/03/04
John Kerry's role model
Phony Vietnam vet Al Hubbard
head of the
Vietnam Veterans Against the War
The New Soldier BY John Kerry
FREE, read it on line right now!
http://ejsmithweb.com/fr/newsoldier/
Questions for Senator Kerry!
1) Are you going to dump Edwards as your VP
because he didn't serve when he could have?
2) How's Al Hubbard now-a-days?
Is he getting ready to hit your campaign trail?
3) Is it true Jane Fonda is coming out to?
I believe Rasmussen is polling scared since his 2000 disaster.
The leftwing 527s and the MSM have to really start cranking up now.
"Fairness" be d*mned. This is serious, John Kerry could LOSE, and in doing so, by any more than a razor-thin margin, could wreck the Democrat party for a generation.
Has the Bush bounce already ended? That's it -- four points for three days with a quick narrowing to two?
Labor Day weekend ... Republicans are out of town. Which reminds me ... what am I doing here?
The polls of next week will give a good idea of where we are. I am thinking they will show Bush ahead by 5 or 6 points.
I guess we'll have to wait for Gallup to settle it.
It's not even a 2 point gap. It's 1.2%! Man, I hope Ras is an outlier...
Polls taken during the Labor Weekend are not accurate. A lot of people are away from home. Thus, they won't be there to talk to pollsters.
This adds some support to the contention that Time and Newsweek are pulling a rope-a-dope trick with their eleven-point-lead polls. They intend to call Kerry the reincarnation of the Comeback Kid when their next polls are more realistic. Remember, Evan Thomas of Newsweek said the media bias in favor of Kerry is worth 15 points. Rope-A-Dope is just part of the way the media intends to make sure Thomas is correct. Do not fall for the Newsweek/Time stories.
Rasmussen weights his samples using a 39% Dem 35% Rep 26% Ind breakdown. He believes that this will be the composition of the actual voter population on November 2 of this year. A large Harris party ID survey (6000 respondents) earlier this year found a simliar partisan breakdown among voters.
Newsweek, LA Times, and others that show wild fluctuations from poll to poll do not weight their samples by party ID at all. Generally speaking, the large spikes and dips in these polls can be attributed to their samples being skewed in favor of one party in one poll, and the other party in the next. In fact, if you apply a more realstic party weighting to yesterday's Newsweek poll, you will get results similar to Rasmussen.
Rasmussen attributes his embarrassing showing in 2000 to his failure to weight his samples by party. He claims that had he done so, his poll would have shown Gore leading by 1, instead of Bush leading by 8 or 9 in his final 2000 poll.
Bush JA at 52%. This is the lowest in three days (he was 54% yesterday) and seems to suggest merely a bad polling day for Bush. But either way, as I've been maintaining for some time, with RAS you have to look at the JA rating as an indicator of where Bush really is, and he's very strong. A 52% translates into more than 320EVs. If he gets to 55%, we're looking at 350 EVs.
Newsweek has it 54 to 43 Pres. Bush!
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/09-04-2004/0002244238&EDATE=
I show the last three days worth of raw data to be 48-51-44 for Bush and 45-45-49 for Kerry. Bush's 51% number represents the first day of polling after his speech. His 44% number is from yesterday. Sooooo, if Rasmussen's polling data is correct, something must have happened between Friday and Saturday that significantly hurt Bush, and significantly helped Kerry. To my mind, nothing did. So let's look at another option. Looking at past data, Bush polls terribly on Sunday's in Rasmussen's raw data. This weekend he's polled terribly on Saturday. This is Labor day weekend, and I just heard on the radio more people are on the road this Labor day weekend than last year. To determine whether Labor Day polling is a factor, I think I will wait until Thursday's Rasmussen numbers to determine whether his poll shows a Bush bounce.
Something's gotta be wrong here. There are two polls that contradict this beyond the MOEs.
This poll is the one that Bush supporters want publicized. If he is too far ahead, people will take for granted he is in, and that's not good.
"Oh well, the Bush bounce is over", clucks the MSM. Must be due to Kerry's brilliant rant an hour after Bush's acceptance speech.
Election 2004
Presidential Ballot
Bush 47.6%
Kerry 46.4%
Other 2.6%
Not Sure 3.4%
RasmussenReports.com
BOUNCE IS OVER: PER FREEREPUBLIC FAVORITE POLLSTER
Is there something wrong with this poll? It hasn't changed for a year.
You must remember that Scott Rasmussen has a serious credibility problem. His way of dealing with it, it seems, is to show the race constantly tied, regardless of what the other polls are saying. I just have trouble believing him fully.
That said, it is worthwile watching some of his stuff.