Harris Poll Bush Lead By 8 Depending on Likely Voters

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/10-20-2004/0002289475&EDATE= ^

[ironmike4242]

I'd rather have the additional information they present, and to see what goes into their assumptions in analyzing the results, than for them to just come out and declare one set of numbers as being "correct". At least this way we can see the possible range of outcomes. The fact is no one really knows how best to define likely voter this year. Why should a pollster try to pretend that know any better?

My problem is when they start dipping into their samples to find sub-samples like Harris did with this one. A poll of 250 people is meaningless. And the jist of the article is "these sub-samples are statistically meaningless, but here they are anyway, and here are some conclusions you can draw from them. It's misleading. The only worthwhile number is the main one. 1,016 adults, Bush ahead 48-46. But that's not news, so they have to find sub-samples to try and "sex it up."

[wireman]

If he's doing better in liberal bastions like California, Illinois, and New York, why would he be faring poorly in traditional Republican states like Ohio?

I just don't buy it. The pollsters are trying to make it a closer race than really exists. When the race is over, they're done for four years. They want to seem relevant right up until the end.

[LS]

Guess that 8-point lead I heard about has something to it after all :)

[IMRight]

The Kerry leading in Swings states polling is utter crap becasue of the states they count as 'swing states'. WA, OR, PA, MI are not the true swing states. They have a solid democratic base and have enormous populations. They skew the result of 'swing state' polling.

That's really the issue. I don't know what states they're counting in the 17, but I remember the list of 12 "swing states" and almost all of them were states Gore won in 2000. Kerry had BETTER be up in an overall poll of those states, or this won't be close. With the exception of FL,OH, and NH... are there ANY Bush states that Kerry is making a run for? And if they're balancing by population, some of these "swing" states are going to throw things WAY off.

[UlsterDavy]

You have been FReeping for years?

zwerni:
Member since 2004-10-15

[reformedliberal]

I find it interesting that the legacy media made a huge deal of the missing Christian votes after the successful DUI smear and then the KE campaign tried to get between the POTUS and the Evangelicals with the Mary Cheney comment, but Zogby, who is in Kerry's tank, now says it was a myth.

I am busy for the rest of the week, but maybe someone could research these items by looking at legacy media comments immediately after the 2000 election. Did Zogby and Co dispute this, then?

I specifically recall assertions in the media before the 2000 election aimed at casting doubt on Bush's pro-life credentials.

[goldstategop]

Bush breakaway - Harris is generally regarded as a liberal poll. Add three points and Bush is up by 11+! You're looking at a blowout. Add to that the similar ABC NEWS poll due out later today and I'd say we can start relaxing a bit but not being complacent. The swing state polls will soon follow. Imagine what this does to Kerry in weak Blue States like NJ, PA, MI, IA, WI, MN, NM, and OR where Algore won by a few hundred to a few thousand votes in 2000 and you're looking at at meltdown mode time over in the bowels of the DNC. No one was expecting a decisive Bush breakaway two weeks before the election - it began yesterday and is gathering strength, accelerating and solidifying. This is just amazing!!! FOUR MORE YEARS, FOUR MORE YEARS, FOUR MORE YEARS, FOUR MORE YEARS!

[MichelleWSC]

"Does this mean that voters are not excluded if they were not old enough to vote in 2000? If so, it is oversampling people who are 18-22 years old, and automatically disqualifying anyone over 22 who did not vote in the 2000 election."


---Not sure what you meant or Harris meant LOL This poll, like Kerry, flip-flopped all over the place with a kind of logic that would give most doctors cause to have it committed to the funny fare for an evaluation.

There was a link posted here a few weeks ago to an article that broke these polls down and basically said Harris was worthless poll. And even though they have some good to okay numbers for Bush I think I'll stick with the article and say they are worthless.

[MichelleWSC]

"Add to that the similar ABC NEWS poll due out later today"


---I swaw the thread title about the rumored ABC poll today but it was pulled. What did it say and why was it pulled?

[Dave S]

If he's doing better in liberal bastions like California, Illinois, and New York, why would he be faring poorly in traditional Republican states like Ohio?

Because Dems are spending more on ads and get out the vote efforts in those states than ever before. The battle is in the battleground states.

[HostileTerritory]

I'd be pretty damn shocked if a tracking poll showed a 3 point jump for Bush in one day. It's unthinkable, even under ideal circumstances, and would indicate a bad sample.

[wireman]

Dems are spending more on ads and get out the vote efforts in those states...

And the Republicans aren't? Then why is Clinton going to Philly instead of Ohio next week?

Watch the polls in the next few days - it'll be 1984 all over again.

[Tennessean4Bush]

I'd be pretty damn shocked if a tracking poll showed a 3 point jump for Bush in one day. It's unthinkable, even under ideal circumstances, and would indicate a bad sample.

Yes, but it might mean a bad sample was falling off and not added on.

[Tennessean4Bush]

If he's doing better in liberal bastions like California, Illinois, and New York, why would he be faring poorly in traditional Republican states like Ohio?

You have broken the code. You are right in your instincts. Is there anyone that can say with a straight face that Bush might win the popular vote by 6-8% and still lose a republican leaning state like Ohio by 2-3% (an 8-11% swing). No way that FL or Ohio varies that much from the national average. in fact, if Bush wins nationally by 6% he will win Ohio and FL by at least that much, 5% at the least.

[Wolfstar]

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. And in 17 swing states -- in which votes for President Bush and Vice President Al Gore were virtually tied in the 2000 elections -- Senator Kerry is doing better and, using one definition of likely voters, the poll shows him ahead. However, the sampling error on this sub-sample in the swing states is substantially higher than for the nationwide sample.

I defy anyone to make rational sense out of the above. With an explanation like that, do they really think we'll still believe polls are "scientific" rather than merely attempts to manipulate the electorate? Hah!

[HostileTerritory]

Not really, no.

[Tennessean4Bush]

Let me get this straight: you are stating that empirically the new sample is the bad one and not the 4 day old sample rolling off. Wow, where did you study mathematics?

[HostileTerritory]

No. The thread title said "Bush 54-Kerry 43" for the ABC-WP poll, which is currently 51/46. A shift like that is impossible through either a bad sample falling off or a good sample coming on.

And you can draw a distinction, because if the bad sample were there we'd have noticed it three days ago when it first made a splash. This poll has been hovering at close numbers in the high 40s for at least a week or more, only starting to diverge the last couple of days. For Bush to go up to 54/43 we'd need to have a sample showing 60% Bush/37% Kerry today. That's why I suspect today's poll rumor was just a rumor, and that's why our host pulled the thread.

Today's poll will probably continue to show Bush with a nice lead, perhaps with a small improvement.

[Tennessean4Bush]

Oh. That is 6 points. For some reason I thought we were talking 3 points. You are right, 6 points would definitely have to be a funky sample. My apologies.

[EDINVA]

Harris has always been a Democrat polling organization ... always !