Zogby still shows it tied today - B46, K46

Reuters ^

[TBBT]

Zogby still shows it tied. I was hoping for a 1 or 2 point uptick for Bush since one weekend day has rolled off. Wonder were it will be when Sunday rolls off?....

[Steve_Stifler]

For someone who's just trying to be an objective Bush supporter trying to inject a little sanity on the topic of polls into FR, you seem to be intent on emphasizing every little of Bush negative polling data while ignoring a lot of good news.

[ClintonBeGone]

you seem to be intent on emphasizing every little of Bush negative polling data while ignoring a lot of good news.

Perhaps you can provide an example beyond my citing of his approval rating?

[ClintonBeGone]

CBG if so, why all the DIM talking points and the cherry picking of "selected" data to prove your point.

I used his approval rating to make a point to a previous poster. All the other stuff you said is not supported by the evidence. If you have examples of me using "DIM talking points" please provide.

[traderrob6]

Heres one quickie....you said Zog was "the most accurate poll in the 2000" election.... Incorrect

[traderrob6]

Using a "selected" piece of of isolated data to make a point is a classic DIM ploy, rarely used by a repub. You may very well be what you say, but you do an awfully good impression of one who has gone over to the Dark Side

[unsycophant]

We can't ignore it. We have to recognize our weaknesses and figure out how to fix them. The goal is to get Bush elected. If it means making adjustments in appearances or speeches, our side needs to know it.

Here is the "but": polls are as subjective as the people who take them, or conduct them and compile the results, and Zogby is no exception. He is not necessarily right--yet he gets a lot of publicity. I blame Rush for this, as he gave the guy a ton of publicity in 1996 for being right about Clinton (like the rest of us did not know he'd win-duh). Zogby's no better at it than anyone else, so we have to consider that also.

Harris has a different take on things:

The Harris Poll® #78, October 20, 2004

Bush Leads by Eight Points – or Two – Depending on Definition of Likely Voters Race appears tighter in swing states

With only two weeks to go before the election, a new Harris Poll finds President George W. Bush leading Senator John Kerry, but the size of the lead depends on how we define likely voters.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=507

[Rokke]

Gallup. And almost every other pollster that continues to use random direct dialing to generate their data. Zogby does not. He uses his own polls to determine demographic info and then calls people based on his own demographic polling data. Here's some more info on your "Gold Standard" pollster from his own mouth...

“The majority of telephone lists for polls and surveys are produced in the IT department at Zogby International. Vendor-supplied lists are used for regions with complicated specifications, e.g., some Congressional Districts. Customer-supplied lists are used for special projects like customer satisfaction surveys and organization membership surveys.

Telephone lists generated in our IT department are called from the 2002 version of a nationally published set of phone CDs of listed households, ordered by telephone number. Residential (or business) addresses are selected and then coded by region, where applicable. An appropriate replicate is generated from this parent list, applying the replicate algorithm repeatedly with a very large parent list, e.g., all of the US.

Acquired lists are tested for duplicates, coded for region, tested for regional coverage, and ordered by telephone, as needed.” Zogby notes that “regional quotas are employed to ensure adequate coverage nationwide.” That is, Zogby takes pains to insure that his respondent poll is not random.

As for his weighting, Zogby states “Reported frequencies and crosstabs are weighted using the appropriate demographic profile to provide a sample that best represents the targeted population from which the sample is drawn from. The proportions comprising the demographic profile are compiled from historical exit poll data, census data, and from Zogby International survey data.”

In other words, Zogby uses his own polls to drive some of his demographic parameters, a practice not approved, much less recommended, by either the NCPP or the AAPOR.

You can read more here....

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:slmPMjXgyfgJ:polipundit.com/index.php%3Fp%3D4176+poll+accuracy,+polling+guide&hl=en

[unspun]

've read that generally undecideds break to the incumbent in a Presidential election, which should also help Bush (although it's somewhat counterintuitive, I think). Hopefully that pattern holds true in this election.

Well, they don't usually --unless you count Gore an incumbent in 2000, for which a case could be made. But in war-time...?

Here are the best two links I've found for poll/vote analysis:

A......B

Personally, I'm just guessing that Kerry will gain about 1.5% to 2.0% from the November 1 RCP average. That means I'm not really feeling very pleasant about it, until and unless it shows Bush up by 4%+ on that day.

[unspun]

Here, this should be much much less scary. It's the current Harris poll. From what I saw a couple days ago, Harris was maybe the most accurate on the presidential race, in 2000.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1251020/posts

EVERYBODY -- TAKE A DEEP BREATH -- REPEAT 3 TIMES -- PRAISE THE LORD AND PRAY -- GET TO WORK (EITHER CAMPAIGNING OR YOUR DAY JOBS)

[NittanyLion]

Well, they don't usually --unless you count Gore an incumbent in 2000, for which a case could be made. But in war-time...?

That's my question. It isn't as though we have the benefit of a great deal of hinsight, so who really knows how they'll break. My hope is that people will go into the booth and vote for continuity in the WOT (even those who disagree with Bush's handling of it).

Zogby suggests the overwhelming majority of undecideds do not believe Bush deserves reelection, but I'm not sure that translates into a Kerry vote. Also, it's hard to cite Zogby on a thread questioning Zogby's accuracy...

[unsycophant]

Dems who are participating in the polls, say they will be voting for Kerry but don't particularly like him.

Their attitude is "Kerry stinks, but Bush stinks more, so I'll vote for the less smelly of the two".

The Left never ceases to surprise me with their dumbness.

[NittanyLion]

So it sounds as though it hinges largely on whether traditional Democrat supporters who did not turn out in 2000 for Gore decide to vote for Kerry in this election. It appears that Fox, Wash. Post, et al are basing their estimates on the assumption that these folks will not vote this year; Zogby and perhaps Rasmussen is doing the opposite. Harris is hedging their bet (fair enough).

The good news appears to be that, even if all these folks turn out, the race is a virtual tie. If some or few turn out, Bush wins the election.

I like those odds...even the worst-case scenario gives us an even chance of winning this election.

[unspun]

Well, reading further, it just underscores (in felt tip pen) what those articles I've referred to state. In any swing state where you can still register people, register conservatives!

Swing those young and new voters!

Get Out That Bush/Republican/Conservative Vote!!

[unsycophant]

Another alternative:

SurveyUSA

[unspun]

That's my question. It isn't as though we have the benefit of a great deal of hinsight, so who really knows how they'll break. My hope is that people will go into the booth and vote for continuity in the WOT (even those who disagree with Bush's handling of it).

According to I believe the most recent Fox poll, something like 64% of voters count this (transition during war) as a concern.

And yes, Zogby seems likely to be just a bit more biased than he admits to himself, from the way I would read these guys.

[unspun]

I like those odds...even the worst-case scenario gives us an even chance of winning this election.

Yes. It is typical for theorists to overplay their favorite theories. God bless us, that is also slightly in our favor. I've heard very hearsay, that Rasmussen somehow bases their adjustments "on 2000."

There is a Marriage Amendment on the ballot in Ohio, too, thank God. Also, elsewhere. Also, frankly, it will be reinforcing for women swing-voters to hear what Fox said last night, the women vote has broken slightly for the President.

We are more comfortable than the side on Jane F. Kohn-Kerry's side.

[ClintonBeGone]

Heres one quickie....you said Zog was "the most accurate poll in the 2000" election.... Incorrect

How is that, as you say, a "Dim talking point". Please back up your claims with some facts.

[mdmathis6]

Why of course!