Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

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= ^

Posted on 10/20/2004 8:15:30 AM PDT by HardHat

Am I the only one who smells some Kerry-favor spinning here? Suddenly a NEW way to look at likely voters? Me thinks they wanted the headline to be not all that damaging for Kerry and decided a "new formula" might just do the trick... Let's see how RCP posts it. Check it out:

Bush Leads by Eight Points - or Two - Depending on Definition of Likely Voters

Race Appears Tighter in Swing States

ROCHESTER, N.Y., Oct. 20 /PRNewswire/ -- 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. These are some of the results of a nationwide Harris Poll of 1,016 U.S. adults surveyed by telephone between October 14 and 17, 2004. Using one definition of likely voters, those who are registered to vote and are "absolutely certain" to vote, the poll shows President Bush with a modest two-point lead (48% to 46%). Using this definition but excluding all those who were old enough to vote in 2000 but did not do so, President Bush has a commanding eight-point lead (51% to 43%). This second definition has proved more accurate in the past, but there are some indications that in this election many people who did not vote in 2000 will turn out to vote, in which case it would be wrong to exclude them. Adding to the confusion about how to define likely voters (and Harris Interactive(R) has not yet decided which definition to use in our final predictions) this poll suggests that Senator Kerry may be doing better in the swing states, in which the battle for electoral college votes will be decided. In 17 swing states (where the total popular vote was tied 48% to 48% in the 2000 election) this poll shows Senator Kerry with a seven-point lead using one definition of likely voters (51% to 44%) and a tie using the other definition (47% each). While these numbers should be treated with caution because of the small sample sizes, they suggest the possibility that the popular vote and the electoral college vote may divide differently, as they did in 2000. This poll also confirms that most likely voters (86%) believe they have made up their minds and will not change them. Bush supporters are more likely than Kerry supporters to say this. However, Kerry supporters (45%) are a little more likely than Bush supporters (39%) to believe that the result of this election will make a great deal of difference to them or their families -- which may increase their likely turnout. Another pair of questions shed light on the reasons why people are supporting the two candidates. Most voters for Bush and for Kerry say they are voting more for their choice rather than against his opponent. However, 40 percent of Kerry supporters say their vote is more a vote against Bush than for Kerry, while only 17 percent of Bush supporters say they are voting mainly against Kerry.

TABLE 1 BUSH VS. KERRY

Q: "If the next presidential election were held today between George W. Bush for the Republicans, John Kerry for the Democrats and Ralph Nader as an Independent, for whom would you most likely vote?"

If respondent said "not sure/refused": Q: "Well, if you had to say would you lean toward George W. Bush, John Kerry, or Ralph Nader?"

Base: Likely Voters Likely Voters Likely Voters (1) (2) % % George W. Bush 48 51 John Kerry 46 43 Ralph Nader 1 1 Other 1 1 Not sure/Refused 4 4 Bush Lead 2 8

Likely Voters (1): Adults who are registered to vote and say they are "absolutely certain" to vote (n=820). Likely Voters (2): Adults who are registered to vote and say they are "absolutely certain" to vote and that (if they were old enough) they voted in 2000 (n=755).

TABLE 2 BUSH VS. KERRY IN 17 SWING STATES

Q: "If the next presidential election were held today between George W. Bush for the Republicans, John Kerry for the Democrats and Ralph Nader as an Independent, for whom would you most likely vote?"

If respondent said "not sure/refused": Q: "Well, if you had to say would you lean toward George W. Bush, John Kerry, or Ralph Nader?"

Base: Likely Voters in Swing States Likely Voters Likely Voters (1) (2) % % George W. Bush 44 47 John Kerry 51 47 Ralph Nader * * Other 1 1 Not sure/Refused 4 4 Bush Lead -7 -

Likely Voters (1): Adults who are registered to vote and say they are "absolutely certain" to vote (n=319). Likely Voters (2): Adults who are registered to vote and say they are "absolutely certain" to vote and that (if they were old enough) they voted in 2000 (n=293). NOTE: This table is based on only 319 and 293 likely voters with a larger sampling error (plus or minus 6 percentage points) than for Table 1. * = Less than 0.5 percent.

TABLE 3 MADE UP MIND OR MAY CHANGE IT

"As far as your voting in the presidential election on November 2nd, have you...?" Base: Likely Voters Likely Election Preference: Voters Bush Kerry % % % Firmly made your decision and won't change your mind 86 91 84 Made a decision but still might change your mind 7 6 9 Not made up your mind yet 7 4 6

Likely Voters: Adults who are registered to vote and say they are "absolutely certain" to vote (n=820).

TABLE 4 HOW MUCH DIFFERENCE RESULT WILL MAKE

"How much difference do you think the result of the election for president will make to you and your family -- a great deal of difference, quite a lot, not much, or no difference at all?"

Base: Likely Voters or Already Voted Likely Election Preference: Voters Bush Kerry % % % A great deal of difference 43 39 45 Quite a lot 30 30 31 Not much 19 23 19 No difference at all 6 5 4 Not sure/Refused 1 2 *

Likely Voters: Adults who are registered to vote and say they are "absolutely certain" to vote (n=828 for Likely Voters or Already Voted). Note: Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding. * = Less than 0.5 percent.

TABLE 5 ARE BUSH VOTERS VOTING FOR HIM OR AGAINST KERRY?

"Is your support for President George Bush more a vote for George Bush OR a vote against John Kerry?"

Base: Likely Voters Who Prefer George W. Bush Total % For George W. Bush 82 Against John Kerry 17 Not sure/Refused 1

Likely Voters: Adults who are registered to vote and say they are "absolutely certain" to vote (n=428 for Likely Voters Who Prefer Bush).

TABLE 6 ARE KERRY VOTERS VOTING FOR HIM OR AGAINST BUSH?

"Is your support for Senator John Kerry more a vote for John Kerry OR a vote against George Bush?"

Base: Likely Voters Who Prefer John Kerry Total % For John Kerry 58 Against George W. Bush 40 Not sure/Refused 2

Likely Voters: Adults who are registered to vote and say they are "absolutely certain" to vote (n=383 for Likely Voters Who Prefer Kerry).

Methodology The Harris Poll(R) was conducted by telephone within the United States between October 14 and 17, 2004 among a nationwide cross section of 1,016 adults (ages 18 and over). Figures for age, sex, race, education, number of adults, number of voice/telephone lines in the household, region and size of place were weighted where necessary to align them with their actual proportions in the population. The two definitions of likely voters are based on samples of 820 and 755, and the two samples of likely voters in swing states are 319 and 293. In theory, with a probability sample of this size (820 or 755), one can say with 95 percent certainty that the results have a statistical precision of plus or minus 3 percentage points of what they would be if the entire U.S. adult population of likely voters had been polled with complete accuracy. Statistical precision for the likely voters in swing states samples (319 and 293) is plus or minus 6 percentage points. Unfortunately, there are several other possible sources of error in all polls or surveys that are probably more serious than theoretical calculations of sampling error. They include refusals to be interviewed (nonresponse), question wording and question order, interviewer bias, weighting by demographic control data and screening (e.g., for likely voters). It is impossible to quantify the errors that may result from these factors. These statements conform to the principles of disclosure of the National Council on Public Polls.

J22300 Q439, Q440, Q441, Q442, Q443, Q445

About Harris Interactive(R) Harris Interactive (http://www.harrisinteractive.com) is a global research firm that blends premier strategic consulting with innovative and efficient methods of investigation, analysis and application. Well known for The Harris Poll(R) and for pioneering Internet-based research methods, Rochester, New York-based Harris Interactive conducts proprietary and public research to help its clients around the world achieve clear, material and enduring results. Harris Interactive combines its intellectual capital, databases and technology to advance market leadership through its U.S. offices and wholly owned subsidiaries: London-based HI Europe (http://www.hieurope.com), Paris-based Novatris (http://www.novatris.com), Tokyo-based Harris Interactive Japan, recently acquired U.S.-based WirthlinWorldwide (http://www.wirthlinworldwide.com) and through a global network of affiliate firms. EOE M/F/D/V To become a member of the Harris Poll Online(SM) and be invited to participate in future online surveys, visit http://www.harrispollonline.com.


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: gwb2004; kewl; polls
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-105 next last
To: BlackRazor
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."

81 posted on 10/20/2004 9:36:08 AM PDT by ironmike4242
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: 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?

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.

82 posted on 10/20/2004 9:40:10 AM PDT by wireman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: KJacob

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


83 posted on 10/20/2004 10:23:26 AM PDT by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: finnman69
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.

84 posted on 10/20/2004 10:24:40 AM PDT by IMRight ("Eye" See BS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: zwerni

You have been FReeping for years?

zwerni:
Member since 2004-10-15


85 posted on 10/20/2004 10:41:48 AM PDT by UlsterDavy (Zell on Kerry: What a bowl of mush! [My name is UlsterDavy and I approve this message])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: KJacob
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.
86 posted on 10/20/2004 11:22:37 AM PDT by reformedliberal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: HardHat

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!


87 posted on 10/20/2004 11:29:31 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Question Liberal Authority
"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.
88 posted on 10/20/2004 11:41:33 AM PDT by MichelleWSC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

"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?


89 posted on 10/20/2004 11:43:13 AM PDT by MichelleWSC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: 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?

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.

90 posted on 10/20/2004 11:46:06 AM PDT by Dave S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: MichelleWSC

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.


91 posted on 10/20/2004 11:47:15 AM PDT by HostileTerritory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Dave S
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.

92 posted on 10/20/2004 11:57:16 AM PDT by wireman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: 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.

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

93 posted on 10/20/2004 11:58:14 AM PDT by Tennessean4Bush (An optimist believes we live in the best of all possible worlds, a pessimist fears this is true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: 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?

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.

94 posted on 10/20/2004 12:01:38 PM PDT by Tennessean4Bush (An optimist believes we live in the best of all possible worlds, a pessimist fears this is true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: HardHat
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!

95 posted on 10/20/2004 12:04:33 PM PDT by Wolfstar (America's enemies, both here and overseas, just love John Kerry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tennessean4Bush

Not really, no.


96 posted on 10/20/2004 12:29:44 PM PDT by HostileTerritory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: HostileTerritory

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?


97 posted on 10/20/2004 12:32:14 PM PDT by Tennessean4Bush (An optimist believes we live in the best of all possible worlds, a pessimist fears this is true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Tennessean4Bush

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.


98 posted on 10/20/2004 12:43:29 PM PDT by HostileTerritory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: HostileTerritory

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.


99 posted on 10/20/2004 1:26:49 PM PDT by Tennessean4Bush (An optimist believes we live in the best of all possible worlds, a pessimist fears this is true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: HardHat

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


100 posted on 10/20/2004 1:28:36 PM PDT by EDINVA (a FReeper in PJ's beats a CBS anchor in a suit every time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-105 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson