Posted on 10/19/2004 12:18:46 AM PDT by dvwjr
Gallup Ping
FReepmail me if you want to be on or off the list.
"You're using registered voters not likely voters, right?"
Gallup needs to separate the two types of registered, the legal registered and the NAACP Crack registered.
Could you use a little bit more color? (/sarcasm)
Thanks. I've been hearing, leading up to this election, that polls of likely voters are more reliable than those of registered voters. Last night, I read something by the host of another site (democRat site) attempting to explain why he feels that registered is better. Maybe he just didn't like that 8 point lead by GWB!
It's too bad that gallup used more Rs than Ds in their sample though. Can you think of any good reason for doing this?
I'm starting to get a bit concerned that the state by state maps don't seem to be following the national polls, although I do know of the claim that the EC maps tend to lag behind the national polls. We should be seeing Florida and Ohio unmistakenly trending to President Bush, but it doesn't seem to be happening, at least not yet. The map now looks pretty much like it did four years ago, except that New Hamphire is now light blue. That's a bit discouraging. It may very well be the case that Gallup is measuring only that Bush is increasing his lead in red states, without really helping himself much in the purple and light blue states.
The color in the spreadsheet allows the eye to quickly center in on voting sub-groups in shades of Blue for Republicans (or Republicans candidates), Red for Democrats (or Democrat candidates) and Green for Independents (or green for various Independent candidates). (/don't care...)
dvwjr
This may seem obvious to some, but you can mark and copy web tables and paste them into Excel. It keeps the labels and colors, and you can graph the numbers.
"How can ANY thinking person vote for Kerry?"
I share your sentiment, but it reminds me of a wonderful Adlai Stevenson quip:
During his 1956 presidential campaign, a woman called out to him, "You have the vote of every thinking person!" Stevenson called back, "That's not enough, madam, we need a majority!"
Argh! I posted in such a hurry earlier that I didn't even notice that last column with your adjusted numbers! Thanks (I think). I say, I think, because obviously your adjusted numbers favor sKerry.
It looks as if Gallup has started poling more Republicans than democrats, what is the reason behind that? If it is true that more Republicans than democrats are being polled, The numbers for Bush will always look better.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks for that.
First most important state: Fla. Because that is the foundation for everything. Then Ohio because that is the closer. Then, failing Ohio, Wis. because that is the fail safe stop loss leaving us one agonizing vote short of the House of Representatives. Then, counting Wis in, Ia with 7 to win. Or, N. Mex with 5 which would also be a win. Then Maine where we could just possibly find the one electoral vote in this ticket splitting state to get us to 269 and a victory in the House.
This means that we must hold all the 2000 states if we lose Ohio. If we lose Florida we must hold Ohio and gain Wis and either Ia. and N. Mex. or Ia and one from Maine. Instead of requiring Kerry to run the table to win as he must if we win Ohio, we must run the table if we lose Fl.
I am aware that other states like Or. or Pa or even NJ can play a decisive role for us but this is my judgment of the probabilities. If we win Ohio we are almost certain to win. If we lose Fl. we are almost certain to lose. If we lose Ohio all eyes turn first to Wis and then the rest.
Godspeed, George Bush.
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.
