Posted on 10/21/2004 1:28:02 PM PDT by TBBT
He said the undecided are undicided for a reason and that they are not likely to break toward Bush after seeing Bush for the last 4 years. If they were happy with Bush they wouldn't be undecided by this point in the game. So if Bush is still tied in the Polls by election day it could be bad news for him when the remaining undecided break...
The pattern has been clear since the 1930s. The only exception was Reagan vs Carter, in which it broke for Reagan.
Undecideds break for the incumbent, or the incumbent party.
All the national polls. George said that his sense is that Bush may be vary slightly ahead but basically this is a very close race. If it's close on election day (as it is today) then it may be a bad thing if the undecideds all break the same way which he said was likely - and it's likely to be against Bush.
That chart is off on the 96 race. Dole lost by quite a bit less than the majority of polls indicated. Things "broke" heavily his way.
BUT, it probably wasn't the undecideds making up their minds. It was the foreknowledge that Clinton would win easily that kept some of his voters from being too motivated to show up.
People who shouldn't be voting.
How about a link?
George Will, Charter Member of the Frightening Hair Hat Club...
Bush has a lead of 3.14% and you got 5% UD's so Kerry needs over 65 Percent of those...just aint happening
I don't believe there are that many "undecided" at this late stage. I believe the way the MSM polls ask the questions leave Bush supporters more likely as "undecided". At the most there is 2% undecided and of those it will split 1% each. The closer the MSM Polls are boost the ratings for the MSM. Bush take over 300 EC Votes.
Who cares about polls?
Too many years as a Cubs fan.....
If, if, if.....
alot of people aren't plugged into politics or current events at all - they only do so the week before the election.
Thank you for posting that as it was very informative.
I too work the phone banks this season and I agree. Many do not answer their phones, many others say neither, some say none of my business...........
http://myelectionanalysis.blogspot.com/2004/09/whither-undecideds.html
1996: Clinton -1, Dole +3 -- Net +4 Challenger
1992: Bush +0, Clinton -2 -- Net +2 Incumbent
1984: Reagan +2, Mondale +2 -- Net 0
1980: Carter +0, Reagan +6 -- Net +6 Challenger
1976: Ford +2, Carter +3 -- Net +1 Challenger
1972: Nixon +0, McGovern +2 -- Net +2 Challenger
1964: Johnson +5, AuH2O +3 -- Net +2 Incumbent
1956: Ike -1.5, Stevenson +1.5 -- Net +3 Challenger
1948: Truman +5.5, Dewey -4.4 -- Net +9.9 Incumbent
1944: Roosevelt +3.5, Dewey -2.5 -- Net +6 Incumbent
1940: Roosevelt +3, Wilkie -3 -- Net +6 Incumbent
1936: Roosevelt +5, Landon -7 -- Net +12 Incumbent
it depends on the unfavorability #. I expect the undecideds to break right along the favorable/unfavorable # for Bush - what is is running at right now?
The Sky has fallen...Georgw Will said so...or is it a possibility..a guess..an opinion?
The single Carter-Reagan debate was October 28, 1980.
Former Carter pollster Pat Caddell claims he begged them not to do it so close to the election. Strategically, this was an extremely stupid move on the part of Carter's people, but doesn't stupidity sum up the entire Carter presidency?
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.