With analysis by Eleanor Clift, of course.
Posted on 10/02/2004 5:47:04 PM PDT by West Coast Conservative
LA TIMES POLL SUNDAY: Bush's favorability rating among debate viewers actually improved slightly (although within the survey's margin of error). Before debate, 51% of watchers viewed Bush favorably, 49% unfavorably; after, numbers were 52% and 47%...
All other polls show Kerry winning the debate (the hardest of hard-core Republicans are the most vocal advocates of this position) but not gaining any ground.
Kerry is going to rue the day he ever uttered the words "global test".
With analysis by Eleanor Clift, of course.
Newsweek polls have always done garbage like this. They had high Republican numbers in the first two polls after the GOP convention and now lots of Dems. It is not a coincidence. I've been following Newsweek polls since 2000. They do this on purpose.
I remember that in 2000 the Newsweak poll problems were so bad that sites like realclearpolitics.com stopped including them in their poll averages. This one also looks very suspect -- I have posted about the problems with this particular poll several times in other posts. Suffice it to say that there are six other polls so far -- Gallup, ABC News, CBS News, Democracy Corp (D), Rasmussen, and the LA Times --that have shown virtually no movement to Kerry since the debate.
<< I actually watched the entire debate last night on PBS for the first time. And I don't know what people are talking about when they say Kerry won. IMO Bush was hands down the more impressive debater. >>
Just curious, which format (full view or split screen) did PBS display? I watched NBC which showed Bush yellow and upclose. Kerry was pink and set back to capture his height. I did hear an analysis (on NPR) that confirmed my suspicions, that depending on network and presentation, people came away w/different views.
Bush knows he has the men...Kerry's only dim hope is to win women over in large numbers. That's where the pacifist, bring them home, let's be nice and get along with everyone and work on health care line has prevailed in the past.
So Bush played nice and didn't land on Kerry with both feet though Kerry gave him many opportunities. Had he driven into those openings like Patton, he'd have given us all a testosterone charge that wouldn't have added any votes that weren't already his.
He wanted the votes he didn't already have not the ones he already had locked up. And that's women...by and large, single women. To do that he had to be "nice" and gentle. Maybe it worked a little...it certainly wouldn't help him to play to votes he already had.
If I remember correctly it was split screen showing Bush's faces, Kerry's incessant nodding(as if he agreed with Bush on everything), and all.
I'd be interested in knowing what Rass's numbers show on Thursday. His numbers are questionable because his likely voter screen is very tight, but by Thursday, this will have shaken out. One day of the three-day average will reflect Cheney/Edwards numbers and it won't be on a weekend.
Exactly. That's why nothing changed in the dynamics of the race. Kerry HAD to knock out Bush on his strongest issue. He couldn't do it and he outsmarted himself by committing several major gaffes. The President is even more likeable than he was BEFORE the debate. I expect Bush to pull in 53% of the vote on Election Day. Not a landslide win but not a close win either. I'll take it over a loss. The is terrific news and you guys are going to have shake the liberal doom and gloom pessimist attitude on FR and starting looking at the Big Picture. If the DT had to report Bush is more popular with the rest of the country, they must be stunned. It ain't going to be a bunch of gleeful libs over at DU once they learn about this. This is the KEY friends, to the election. Now LET'S ROLL!!!
Mr. Marbles...Love that picture! I saw it as is and had to wonder about that man kerry.
For what it's worth (I'm not a fan of Rasmussen's polls or methodology), he reported that on Friday only 6% of voters changed their mind after the debate and that they were almost evenly divided -- Kerry gained 3%, Bush gained 2%, and the other 1% went to either Nader or undecided. He also reported that his numbers for Friday were not different from his numbers for the preceding nights, which seemed to be good for President Bush.
Significantly, of the seven polls I'm aware of that have come out since the debate, six have shown virtually no movement for Kerry. Only one showed movement of as much as two points, and that was the suspect Democracy Corps poll (they are the outfit owned by James Carville). Even that poll still has Bush in the lead right at 50%, with 48% of the 50% representing "hard" support (as opposed to only 46% for Kerry).
The thing I remember is that Kerry never once looked at the camera (ie the people). He was looking at his precious notes and at the moderator. GW looked at US, and that is who matters to him!
As interesting as debates are for political theater, they really don't change minds all that much. Nobody who takes the WOT seriously is going to vote for Kerry. What the debate did manage to do is to put some steel in the spine of the Democrats. Kerry did manage to stop the bleeding.
Newsweek may or may not reflect real opinion. If it does, it's accidental because the methodolgy is invalid.
There is no way GWB's performance in the debates is going to change my vote away from him. And I had no great expectations. What is inside him is what counts to me, and I'm sure, most on this thread. My concern is with "independents" and the outcome of the election!
Anybody buyin'?
My college age daughter in Eugene, OR, listened to the debate on the radio with her roommates. She and all of her friends are voting for Bush. She said'" Bush sounded nicer, gentle, like he really cared, Kerry sounded mean and we did not like his tone or what he said about Bush."
Awesome huh?
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.
