Fun With Polls… Or Not

CNNGallupUSAToday (whee! Just like Drudge!) says Bush is trailing both Kerry and Edwards by double digits.

Rasmussen says Bush is leading Kerry by five.

Will says, “What a crock to be running general election poll stories in February,” and goes to look for dinner…


11 Responses to “Fun With Polls… Or Not”

  1. ilyka Says:

    Will says, “What a crock to be running general election poll stories in February,” and goes to look for dinner…

    Ooh, dinner!

    I can’t find a damn thing to say about the elections because . . . because it’s February. Because it’s February, and because I’m a lousy forecaster.

  2. resurrectionsong Says:

    Guessing Games Start

    It’s hard to take the early Kerry or Edwards v/ Bush polls to seriously. This is a good example of…

  3. jtj Says:

    This is nothing.

    Wait until the election gets closer.

    You’ll have non-partisan polls (e.g., Rasmussen, Mason-Dixon, SurveyUSA, etc.) showing Bush with double-digit leads in, oh, say, 35 states. On the other hand, you’ll have partisan polls (e.g., CNN, ABC, Washington Post, CBS, New York Times, etc.) telling completely different stories. It will be the political universe meets the parallel universe.

    Keep in mind, that with 5 open Senate seats to defend in the South and with a Northeastern liberal likely to be the nominee against a well-funded Republican incumbent (no Northeastern liberal ever has been elected President), the Democratic Party is facing political irrelevance, if not short-term, outright political death. As such, they are starting to unravel before our eyes. And this process will reach a crescendo in the Fall.

    We saw the same thing in California during the final, desparate days of last October’s Recall election. The non-partisan Field Poll had the Recall passing by double digits, and Arnold winning the replacement election by a wide margin. The Los Angeles Times, on the other hand, was insinuating that the margins would be so close, there would be recounts, lawsuits, caos, and anarchy, etc.

    What happened? The Recall passed by double digits, and Arnold won in a ridiculous landslide; just as the non-partisan Field Poll had indicated.

    This is the shape of things to come in November.

  4. Mr. Lion Says:

    ‘course, none of them mention that Bush hasn’t started, y’know, campaigning yet.

    Don’t sweat the details; the motto of the mass media.

  5. Carol in California Says:

    Once you get the hang of it, anybody can do a “poll.” Works on the theory that you make it all up. Until November comes Bush CAN’T WIN the election!

    This is a good thing. Because the media makes advertising money if they can pre-sell the race. Just like Barnum ALWAYS advertised that his circus was coming to town. Turn out would be different if he based his business on SURPRISE!

    Anyway, if I were Karl Rove I’d say I was voting for Kerry. Bush has to run against somebody. And, the democrats have so many problems that it’s NICE to help them out and push them along this road. They keep driving off cliffs, anyway.

  6. Ricky Vandal Says:

    Polls are good, but they should indicate the same trend. What the hell is this all about? In other words they did a poll and afterwards they still know sh*t.

  7. The Sanity Inspector Says:

    I just remember the 17-point lead Michael Dukakis had, coming out of the Dem Convention in ’88.

    It’s still top of the first inning, folks.

  8. hey Says:

    it aint the first inning.. its still freaking november (baseball wise) spring training hasn’t even come close to starting!

    and yeah.. there is the minor issue that bush et al aren’t even trying….

    lets see how the polls are after he’s spent $200 M

  9. Karol Says:

    I love these national polls. Fortunately, we don’t have national elections.

  10. Bloodthirsty Warmonger Says:

    Politicians like Kerry are absolute slaves to the poll-of-the-week, but the bottom line is that the one poll that counts is the election on November 2nd!

  11. Will Collier Says:

    Meaning less poll trivia: Clinton was actually in third place, behind Perot and Bush, going into his own convention in 1992…

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: