. ICR/International Communications Research poll: Bush 51%, Kerry 41%, Nader 2%

ICR/PollingReport ^ | 9/29/04

[ambrose]

ICR/International Communications Research poll. Sept. 24-28, 2004. N=836 registered voters nationwide (MoE ± 3.4); 730 likely voters (MoE ± 3.6).
						.
"If the presidential election were being held today, would you vote for George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, the Republicans, John Kerry and John Edwards, the Democrats, or Ralph Nader and Peter Camejo, the independents?" Order of Bush/Cheney and Kerry/Edwards tickets rotated, with Nader/Camejo ticket always last. If other/none/unsure: "As of today, do you lean more to Bush, the Republican, Kerry, the Democrat, or Nader, the independent?"
						.
		Bush/ Cheney	Kerry/ Edwards	Nader/ Camejo	None/ Other (vol.)	Unsure
		%	%	%	%	%
	Among likely voters:
	9/24-28/04	51	41	2	1	5
	9/8-12/04	51	44	3	1	3
	9/1-5/04	46	46	4	2	3
	8/25-29/04	45	48	2	1	3
	8/4-8/04	46	46	3	1	3
						.
	Among registered voters:
	9/24-28/04	48	41	3	2	7
	9/8-12/04	48	44	3	1	4
	9/1-5/04	43	45	5	2	6
	8/25-29/04	42	49	3	2	5
	8/4-8/04	43	47	4	2	5
						.
Asked of those who answered Nader/Camejo, none, other, or unsure: "Suppose there were only two tickets to choose between: George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, the Republicans; John Kerry and John Edwards, the Democrats. Who would you vote for?" Options rotated         Net results:
						.
		Bush/ Cheney	Kerry/ Edwards	Other (vol.)	Neither (vol.)	Unsure
		%	%	%	%	%
	Among likely voters:
	9/24-28/04	51	43	-	1	5
	9/8-12/04	52	44	-	2	2
	9/1-5/04	48	47	-	2	3
	8/25-29/04	46	50	-	1	4
	8/4-8/04	48	48	-	1	3
						.
	Among registered voters:
	9/24-28/04	50	43	1	1	6
	9/8-12/04	49	45	-	2	3
	9/1-5/04	46	47	-	2	4
	8/25-29/04	44	51	-	1	4
	8/4-8/04	45	50	-	1	4

[TheBigB]

"But they're not polling all the ones who don't vote, have never voted, and have no intention of voting! THEY'RE the ones who will win it for Kerry!!" < /DUh >

[RWR8189]

Who are these guys?

[Recovering_Democrat]

FIGHT VOTER FRAUD
FIGHT VOTER FRAUD
FIGHT VOTER FRAUD
I'm talking to YOU, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida and Wisconsin!!

[ambrose]

Don't know much about them. They mostly do polling for corporations on consumer opinions. I believe the horse race question is just thrown in at the end of such surveys.

[Ravi]

This is more like it. This group was pretty on in 2000 so trust them generally.

[finnman69]

http://www.ncpp.org/1936-2000.htm

they have been around, were not that far off in 2000

[DM1]

this is good how reputable are these guys
i got nervous about OH since someone posted a gallup showing ups dead even / behind there

[ambrose]

Ohio has always been a "problem child" for Bush in the Gallup poll. Even the Sep 9th poll that had him up 9 among LV had him up by only 1 among RV.

[RWR8189]

Looks good to me.

[skaterboy]

Has anyone else seen confirmation of those Ohio #'s?

[zbigreddogz]

Don't forget the dead and fictitious people. The dead and fictitious crowd really like Kerry.

[finnman69]

the DUmmies were glowing over them, this is after they spent the day bashing Gallup.

[Clump]

I have been looking everywhere and nothing has been reported. So far only the one Freeper who hear a report on the radio. I am hoping he either misheard or the reporter misspoke. This is one of the reasons hearsay is generally inadmissible in court. Let's wait and see. Even if it is correct, this is one of those polls where the margin of error comes in to play. I have just seen way too much momentum and excitement in Ohio to think it has tightened up. Does anyone really believe the race is in a dead hear in N.J, MD., and Ohio? I'm not buying it.

[ambrose]

Look, he was just reporting the latest Gallup numbers for Ohio.

It is what it is.

[TheBigB]

STRATEGIC VISION NUMBERS JUST OUT FOR OHIO: Bush 52%-Kerry 43%.

[Lurking2Long]

Has anyone else seen confirmation of those Ohio #'s?

I don't trust that particular thread...

[DrDeb]

ICR is a well-respected pollster!


We must prepare ourselves for the way in which the LEFTstream media will behave for the next 4 weeks:

Surge Protector
As you watch the debate on Thursday night, remember: No matter what happens, on Friday morning, you're going to hear that the race is tightening.
by Mike Murphy
http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/694ipstv.asp

Excerpts:
A SURE BET in this campaign is that the media will write a big October comeback story for John Kerry. It is evitable for three reasons. First, the media works in a pack that is happiest when following a simple narrative. Second, from moribund to miracle campaigner is Kerry's tiresome myth turned worn-out cliché. Third, this is indeed a tight race and--as with any incumbent seeking reelection--the undecided vote will break heavily against Bush, which will make Kerry look like he is surging late. (Even hapless Michael Dukakis had such a late surge.)
. . . .
The media's Kerry comeback will unfold in earnest after this Thursday's debate. What actually happens in the debate, barring a highly entertaining Tourette's style meltdown by one of the candidates, really doesn't matter. This is the first campaign debate in George W. Bush's career where he has entered with performance expectations, a troubling burden. While I expect the president will actually do well, that expectations game and the comeback narrative will combine, through the media's funhouse mirror, to put Kerry back in the race. Even though it may ultimately be simply an optical illusion.

[jwalsh07]

It is what it is.

Unless Gallups demographics changed radically in which case it is Moveon.moron.

[southernnorthcarolina]

...this is indeed a tight race and--as with any incumbent seeking reelection--the undecided vote will break heavily against Bush...

That is indeed the conventional wisdom, but I'm not so sure that history backs the theory up.

Polling was in its infancy under FDR (see Literary Digest and its prediction of a Alf Landon win in 1936), but I'm not aware of any anti-incumbent wave, or a break of undecideds to the challenger, in any of Roosevelt's three reelection wins (not that I was around then).

In 1948, in the biggest presidential upset in U.S. history, incumbent Harry Truman evidently benefited from a late surge in his favor.

In 1956, Dwight Eisenhower stood for reelection in a replay of the 1952 race against Adlai Stevenson. I don't think there's any evidence of a break of the undecideds toward Stevenson; certainly the final results were similar to the 1952 results -- an Ike landslide.

The next incumbent to stand for election was Lyndon Johnson in 1964. To the extent that Goldwater experienced a late boost from the undecideds, it didn't register in the blowout.

Richard Nixon ran for reelection in 1972. No late surge for McGovern. Of course, Nixon had McGovern's secret strategic plans by then.

In 1976, Gerald Ford stood for election as the incumbent. He came from way down to come within an eyelash of pulling out a win.

In 1980, Jimmah stood for reelection. And here, there is evidence that the undecideds broke for the challenger late. But come on. The challenger was Ronald Reagan. I knew Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan was a friend of mine. And Mr. Kerry, you're no Ronald Reagan. And, I would add, George Bush is no Jimmah Carter. I am convinced that the "undecideds break for the incumbent" belief springs almost solely from the 1980 election.

In 1984, Ronald Reagan ran for reelection. I noted no late break of the undecided vote toward Mondale. But again, as in 1964 and 1972, in a rout of this proportion, who knows?

In 1992, George H.W.Bush ran for reelection. The campaign was a disaster, but I don't recall that it was a matter of a late surge toward Clinton.

In 1996, Clinton ran for reelection. Again, I'm not aware of a late break to Dole among the undecideds.

Now, I will note that in 1948, 1964, and 1976, the incumbent wasn't running for reelection, having ascended to the Presidency sans election. Perhaps the voters were willing to give incumbents in such cases the benefit of the doubt (though not enough so to bail out Ford). So discard those three if you wish. I still don't see a trend toward a late anti-incumbent vote.