11/3 Zogby Poll Final Numbers (Some Shockers)

Meet The Press | 11/03/02 | Zogby

[Ed_in_LA]

Minn: Mondale 50% Coleman 45%

TX: Kirk 48% Cornyn 49%

NJ: Lautenberg 54% Forrester 38%

Ark: Pryor 51% 40%

SD: Johnson 52% Thune 47%

GA: Cleland 49% Chambliss 49%

CO: Strickland 53% Allard 44%

NC: Bowles 46% Dole 52%

FL Gov: McBride 42% Bush 57%

[Nataku X]

good points

[GoMonster]

i agree don't dismiss. he may well be accurate. however, he wasn't on target in 94. his claim to fame is that he said dole wouldn't lose as bad as everyone thought he would.

[Nataku X]

But does having "Excellent", "Good", "Fair", "Poor" categories and then lumping *all* of the "Fair" into the "bad" column represent an accurate portrait of the candidate? that is how he has done Bush's approval ratings several times.

[DoughtyOne]

You guys raise a good point. I didn't realize he had a brother. Perhaps that is who I saw in the mentioned interview.

[GoMonster]

i agree. bush will maybe get 53%. max. no way 57%

[mystery-ak]

Thanks for your replies....I can't read them....LOL.....this is only happening to me on this thread!

[Timesink]

Zogby's special sauce is obviously figuring in a huge RAT turnout in most states. He has a pretty good track record on these things, but I sure hope he is missing this one.

I've seen a lot of people worrying about the "huge RAT turnout," "huge minority turnout," etc. But I've yet to see one article giving any reason why we should be expecting it, beyond the usual RAT knock-and-drags they give to blacks as if they were subhuman. And I don't think that's going to be enough. They might be able to turn one or two races somewhere - not necessarily Senate races, either - but that's about it. Remember, it didn't work in Florida, and that was their ultimate dirty play.

[ForGod'sSake]

Hey deport, have you got it backwards??? If we're lookin' at the same numbers, Rasmussen had Al Snore @ 49%; Bush @ 40%. Maybe I'm on the wrong page...

FGS

[comebacknewt]

I have been predicting RATS +1 in the Senate. After looking over the last round of polls, I am revising it to RATS +2.

I really hope it doesn't get to +3 or +4.

I do think the GOP adds a little to their House margin. I will say +4 for GOP there.

[Dave S]

Up to this year, the Dems have run (with the help of their friends in organized labuh) the far better ground campaign; supposedly the GOP has learned something from this but we'll see Tuesday nite.

Not too sure about that. They supposedly have a 72 hour campaign going on. Presumably thats the 72 hours before the polls open. So far Ive had one recorded call from Sen Kit Bond and an offer of tickets to the Bush/Talent event Monday night and thats it. No one calling to see if Im voting. No pollsters. Nada. Plenty of mailers and TV ads but no one knocking on doors, few yard signs, and no calls.... well take that back. As I was writing this I got call from Charleton Heston saying to vote for Talent (took over a minute for him to say what he was calling about. Didnt hear him say who he was or why he was calling, just a bunch of jubberish about freedom, blah, blah. Not very effective in my view and Im a gun owner.

[Dog Gone]

Oh dear. Now, I'm being thanked for my smartass response up the thread.

I feel so guilty...

[ForGod'sSake]

Beltway Boys.

Yeah, I caught that segment also. They must have gotten wind of Zogby's latest, er, adjustments. They hardly qualify as ALL the pundits in any case, and of course they still call the race for Cornyn...

FGS

[For the Unborn]

And wasn't it FOX that had a round table last weekend that said Mondale hands down without even a hint that this could change? Last time I will ever listen to Brit Hume and Bill Kristol.

[Nataku X]

check out Zogby's poll numbers on the Illnois gubernational race.

He's been off wildly on state-level races before. IMHO there's no such thing as a good pollster... anyone can survey within 10% room... it all depends on black and Democratic turnout, it is ALWAYS the deciding variable... very low turnouts in 1994, higher in 1998. And I do not think anybody knows what it will be like until Election day.

If you hear CNN announcing larger-than-normal turnout at noon on Tuesday... it is all over for us, I promise. We do not need to know the makeup of this turnout. If it is low, we get the senate. If it is high, we lose seats in the Senate. If it is very abnormally high like in 2000, we lose the House.

[mathluv]

If I am the ONLY one voting Republican so be it!!!

You won't be. I voted early and voted straight Republican. I had to hold my nose on some of our local RINOs, but I voted!!!

[BlackRazor]

Yes, IL was one of the 3 states that Zogby miscalled.

[longtermmemmory]

Right now labor is running the mcbride "machine" the old condo people have already voted or will vote from their inside condo polling places.

The turnout for early voting has been HUGE. Lines lines and more lines. A LOT of african american votes have been cast.

PS don't forget the 8000+ votes of republicans that were cheated in 2000 by the early call. The lesson? IGNORE THE NEWS MEDIA UNTIL AFTER YOU HAVE CAST YOUR VOTE.
___________________
to ALL
__________________

I just go an automated call from the Bush Campaign it said there is a rally in Davie FL at 4:30 with Rudy Guiliani does anyone know anthing about this. I accidentally droped the phone.

[Dave S]

But does having "Excellent", "Good", "Fair", "Poor" categories and then lumping *all* of the "Fair" into the "bad" column represent an accurate portrait of the candidate? that is how he has done Bush's approval ratings several times.

Thats how Presidential ratings have always been done, whether by Zogby or others. People dont like using negative points in a rating scale so pollsters put in additional positive categories to avoid all respondents answering either "excellent" or "good". To you, a "fair" may not sound bad but to a trained professional who knows that the respondents also had a choice of "Excellent" and "Good" its not a positive statement. For example if your wife was asked how you perform in bed and she said "fair" I doubt you would be too happy about it.

[linn37]

thats what I heard Russert say too,how can that be accurate if your pushing the voter into making a choice over a telephone?

[OldFriend]

Sorry, you are wrong. He was caught out and exposed on Sean Hannity's radio program during the 2000 campaign. He waffled and fumbled the answer by saying he didn't have the questions at hand but but but.

A woman attorney was polled by Zogby and recognized 'leading' questions. She called Sean and then he rushed to call Zogby to give him a chance to rebut and he COULDN'T.