Los Angeles Times Poll, like Newsweek Poll, Shows Whopping 1 Point Bounce for Kerry. Pop the Corks!

Los Angeles Times ^ | 10/03/2004 | Whitman

[timbuck2]

October 3, 2004 Sunday SECTION: MAIN NEWS; National Desk; Part A; Pg. 1 LENGTH: 1414 words HEADLINE: THE RACE FOR THE WHITE HOUSE; THE TIMES POLL; Viewers Give Round 1 to Kerry; Most who watched Thursday's debate say it added to the Democratic candidate's luster, but not at the expense of Bush's standing. BYLINE: Ronald Brownstein and Kathleen Hennessey, Times Staff Writers DATELINE: WASHINGTON

...These survey results reflect attitudes only among registered voters who watched the debate. Their views are more apt to change than the views among voters overall, many of whom did not watch the debate.

The poll, conducted Thursday night and Friday, surveyed 1,368 registered voters who participated in a Times survey last week and agreed to be contacted after the Sept. 30 debate. Among the group, 725 voters said they had watched the debate; it is their responses the poll reports. The poll, supervised by polling director Susan Pinkus, has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

The voters who watched the debate were slightly more favorable to Kerry than the overall electorate even before the encounter began, the poll showed.

For instance, in last week's Times poll, Kerry trailed Bush among all registered voters by 49% to 45%. But the voters who watched the matchup preferred Kerry by 48% to 47% for Bush before the debate. After the debate, viewers divided nearly the same way, with 49% favoring Kerry, 47% Bush.

That tracks with other post-debate polls showing improvements in Kerry's image but generally little immediate change in the race. The exception is a Newsweek poll conducted Thursday night through Saturday that showed Kerry leading Bush 49% to 46% among registered voters, with a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points...

[igoramus987]

Hmmm... not much of a gain - and we've yet to see the impact of John F*ckin's "global test" gaffe reflected in the polls. Have faith, people. Its not over yet.

I think Kerry not knowing about the US already having sanctions on Iran was pretty bad too. Considering they are the US's greatest threat. I'm not surprised that his position with Iran is the same as what Albright/Clinton offered North Korea.

[Max Combined]

"I predict Bush by an average of 5% among likely voters in Monday's polls."

I hope you are right. All the spin after the polls will probably hurt Bush, I fear.

[tobyhill]

At first glance I thought Kerry won the debate but now 3 days later there is one thing that has convinced me he actually lost,"global test". If these 2 words aren't enough to scare most, I don't know what is? Kerry is now trying to say the words have been taken out of contents but this one he can't flip-flop because of the phrase which he used the words. I think if the MSM, bloggers, posters and even the President will pound these words, the true Kerry is doomed. It should be used from every time he mentions our healthcare and economy to the War on Terrorism. Well Kerry, before you voted on it did it pass the "global test"? It's amazing how two simple words can doom someone.

[Freepdonia]

I hope you are right. All the spin after the polls will probably hurt Bush, I fear.

Fortunately, we have Fox News, the blogosphere and talk radio to counteract all that crap. This is not 1964 that we are dealing with.

[tirednvirginia]

I thought I just heard Chris Wallace say on Fox News Sunday that Kerry is ahead by 2 points in both Newsweek and L. A. Times.

[Noachian]

The last poll I'd believe would be a LA Times poll no matter what its results were.

The fact is Bush did an Al Gore imitation in the debate and it cost him.

Maybe Rove will get Bush better prepared the next time around. Bush has the substance, the facts, and the logic to "gut" Kerry, but he won't use it.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Because the bad guys now have the big mo.

Only if you define the "bad guys" as the MSM....otherwise it seems Americans are sticking with their President.

[TNCMAXQ]

This is still confusing to me though. Didn't they have a poll only a week or 2 ago with Bush UP by several? This Kerry lead from even before the debate sounds bogus to me. I remember being stunned at hearing the LA Times, which knowingly skewed polls in favor of the Dems before, had GWB up by several points. Is it possible they polled a different group specifically about the debate?

[timbuck2]

Everybody said Gore won debate #1 in 2000 too. Well, turns out amongst likely voters, he won the debate because he made gains in the polls. One can win on style and even substance, but if the electorate is more concerned about who is the better leader, winning adebate on points is utterly meaningless. We'll see late tonight or tomorrow what the real polls say.

-T

[Noachian]

At first glance I thought Kerry won the debate ...

He did win the debate. But, he couldn't keep his mouth shut, and gave so many openings to bush it was unbelievable that Bush didn't go after him.

The "Global Test" was only one of many idiot remarks Kerry made. The NY City subway didn't shut down; the nuclear bunker-buster bomb is another weapon that Kerry would kill; Kerry would sign the Kyoto protocol, and decimate the economy; Kerry would "dump" our allies in Asia against the North Koreans, but he insists on having UN allies for our war on Iraq.

There was so much more that he damned himself with, but Bush let it all slip by.

[tobyhill]

"I thought I just heard Chris Wallace say on Fox News Sunday that Kerry is ahead by 2 points in both Newsweek and L. A. Times."

The poll is registered voters by telephone and began right after the debate on Thursday night. I really don't trust polls that begin so early after a debate because the true points aren't really absorbed that quickly. I think the polls will be where they were, Bush by 4-6%, on Wed or Thur this week. The MSM has always loved to play thing poll swing game even though in reality debates may only swing elections 1 or 2% points. The main objective of debates anymore is just don't say anything stupid. Kerry made that mistake at least 3 times but the biggest one being "global test".

[timbuck2]

I believe they did have a different sample for the pre and post debate polls. Bush was up by 5 in the last LA Times poll, I believe. So yes, the poll prior to the debate showing Kerry up by one is clearly pretty silly. It probably shows an oversampling of Dems like the Newsweek poll.

-T

[DestroytheDemocrats]

".Bush has improved his "likeability" numbers by a point since the debate.

Yeah but on the radio this AM the Newsweek and LA Times polls were trumpeted. "Kerry pulling even with Bush!!" And on Fox News with Chris Wallace the panel gave the impression that Bush could lose the election, it's now a horserace, blah blah bhah. They are all so predictable.

Bush could have and should have done better in that debate. Why he did not put forth a better effort I don't know. But he let us all down. That's just a fact. Of course all is not lost. I love President Bush but if he does not at least tie one and win the other of the next two debates he will have let the presidency slip out of his hands, and let down America. If winning at least one presidential debate is one of the qualifications for being President (rightly or wrongly) and you can't win even win one.....then you are not qualified to be President.

That's how it works...like it or not.

[timbuck2]

DestrotheDems,
Again, the definition of winning the debate involves moving the electorate one way or the other. Who won on points for 90 minutes is really meaningless if voters walk away saying "yeah, okay, Kerry is a solid debater, but I am not voting for him for his debating skills."

We'll see with the likely voter polls that ocme out late tonight or tomorrow...

-T

[conservativecorner]

The Media by all signs are going to push the following line this week. "Kerry makes comeback in polls and closes gap on major issues." Matt makes the point below that there appears to be collusion between the "paper of record" and the DNC/Kerry campaign. The President needs to campaign and debate as if he really is down by 5 points, and continue to hit John Kerry with his inconsistencies and nonexistent "plans". This as the saying goes is, "where the rubber hits the road", and we’ve got to keep the pressure on and get the word out however and wherever we can. 4 more years will be reality in just 30 days. ****Newsweek is the first out with the Kerry Comeback poll, here are a few sites looking at the wacky numbers.

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/008037.php

http://www.redstate.org/story/2004/10/2/182143/492

http://politicalvicesquad.blogspot.com/2004/10/liberal-media-cognitive-

• dissonance.html

http://instapundit.com/archives/018191.php

[timbuck2]

http://politicalvicesquad.blogspot.com/2004/10/liberal-media-cognitive-dissonance.html

Here's the partisan breakdown for today's "poll" by NewsWeak:

R = 34 percent
D = 36 percent
I = 27 percent
Not stated = 3 percent

In other words, they decreased Republican sampling by 5 percentage points and increased Democratic sampling by 6 full percentage points. Furthermore, this "poll" strictly was limited to the "Pacific and Mountain time zones." In other words, registered voters from the following states completely were excluded: Texas, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Louisiana, Arkansas, Kentucky, Indiana, and the entire old south.

[DestroytheDemocrats]

"We'll see with the likely voter polls that ocme out late tonight or tomorrow... "

I do hope you are right and you probably are. It's just that Bush missed such an opportunity to put Kerry away and it seems like he failed to prepare and that there is no excuse for it.

He has to be on his game next time. He's going to start to look dumb if he is not. I am sorry but it is true. If he loses next time it will be 20 times worse than the first loss.

[timbuck2]

I agree that Bush should do better, but the guy is not a good debater so hoping for a briliant performance is not realistic. What one has to hope for in Bush debates is that his personality shines through. His sincerity, resolve, etc. are key and perhaps he fell short of expectations in debate 1, but I relaly am not that nervous about debate 1's implications for the overall race.

-T

[Barlowmaker]

There was so much more that he damned himself with, but Bush let it all slip by.

I'm admittedly an obsequious Bush-bot, but I just cannot get on board with that "take".

We seem to have a lot of folks here who are consumed with style over substance factors. These are hardly debates, they are beauty contests.

My little informal Fred Luntz-esque focus group of friends and family came away from Thursday night's festivities with one major perception reinforced: that John Kerry is an imperious twit.

Bush hammered home salient point after salient point. Inarticulately at times? Sure, welcome to Bushville. Folks have come to accept that about our Prez. His exasperated looks were well warranted.

When in doubt, I use Hugh Hewitt as a reality check. Hugh saw the same Bush steamrolling of Kerry I saw.

I just don't see what you see. Incidentally, that doesn't make you wrong. Put perhaps your expectations were unrealistic?