POLITICS: Bush Opens 4 Point Lead In latest Reuters/Zogby Poll

President Bush, in the fallout from the last round of debates has opened up a four point lead over Democratic rival Sen. John Kerry in the latest poll data from Reuters/Zogby. Of particular interest is the President"s building momentum among key groups, including women, Catholics, and the younger voters.



This is especially critical in states that have now become battleground, such as PA and NJ. Kerry needs to find a way to "connect" with his base if he hopes to maintain his reputation as a "closer".

Related News Links:
abcnews.go.com
abcnews.go.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Poll: Voting For Kerry or Bush or just voting against Bush or Kerry
Lost the popular vote by 500,000. Did everyone forget?

[edit on 15-10-2004 by everlastingnoitall]

I just KNOW this is largely due to Kerry's comments about Cheney's daughter.

I support neither candidate but Kerry's remark was uncalled for. Not just his remark, but his mannerisms surrounding the remark. He came off as very smug and stammered a bit before announcing she is "a lesbian". He sounded very uncomfortable with her sexuality. Kerry's comment has been analyzed ad nauseum on EVERY news channel and he has mostly been portrayed in a negative light.

Now, I felt Kerry had the slightly better debate OTHER than this statement, and I think most agreed. So it is very telling that he has slipped 3 percentage points since the debate. I think his remark could be the "October Surprise" that gets Bush re-elected.

Well, I don't think it has only to do with his comments regarding the daughter, although that clearly has been a miscalculation on his campaign's part. The real problem for him is his lackl of ability to truly connect and rally his party behind him. Too many people are voting for Kerry simply because he is not Bush, and not voting truly for him. This is dangerous for him because it means a large number of his base could be swayed. Maybe not to Bush, but perhaps to Badnarik or Nader.

Yeah I agree with that too. I know far more Bush-haters than Kerry supporters who are voting for Kerry simply because they hate Bush. And I think Kerry has based his campaign too much on bashing Bush rather than on what he will do for the country. I will not vote for either simply because it goes against the very idea of Democracy to vote for "the lesser of two evils" when there are a plethora of 3rd party candidates, even though none of them have a realistic chance of unseating the two-party throne. On principle alone...people who don't support either shouldn't vote for either. If enough people vote for 3rd parties...that WILL come out in the popular vote...and if say, 20% of voters don't vote for Kerry or Bush...perhaps 3rd parties can gain a bit of legitimacy moving into 2008...it will be a gradual process but right now the 2-party system is becoming very dangerous to American politics. I buy into the New World Order but I know a lot don't...so I won't get into that here.

But I think Kerry's comments turned a lot of Bush-haters themselves off...and perhaps will sway the vote to 3rd party candidates...and undecided 2 party voters to Bush.

That is almost verbatim the point I made to my dad, who is voting for Bush solely on the gay marriage issue. He claimed voting third party a 'wasted vote'. I disagree. if enough people actually studied issues, instead of walking party lines with the major two, we might actually have a democratic process. Now, in all fairness, I support Bush and encouraged him to check Bush's stance (he's not very political, although he also leans Bushward on the war after my step sister nearly got killed in Iraq), and would never try to convince a fellow Bushie to change their mind, but I also encouraged him to make his mind up based on all the issues, and not become a dangerous single issue voter. A would welcome a viable third party. I think it would do a great service to the process. unfortunately, our two major parties have such a stranglehold on media it's nearly impossible to make your voice heard in the background.

You sound intelligent and keen on American politics...I appreciate your response.

I have many otherwise intelligent friends who have hated Bush for the last couple of years...and most of these friends don't know the first thing about politics...and have actually admitted numerous times that they "never watch the news and have no idea what's going on in the world". In fact, one friend even mentioned after Hurricane Ivan that he had "no idea that any hurricanes had hit Florida, I never watch the news". This same friend talks sh1t on Bush all the time and talks about how great Kerry is. Kerry is only great in the mind of these people because he runs opposite Bush. When I asked them what they like about Kerry, they answer "Well, he's not Bush and he disagrees on all the issues". Actually, if these people would bother to look into it - there are plenty of other candidates who are not Bush...and as much as the media would like you to believe otherwise, Kerry and Bush are pretty darn similar...their supposed differences are actually minor in the grand scheme of things and their proposed policies are very similar.

I just wish these people would explore 3rd party candidates if they hate Bush so much and have no defense for Kerry other than hating Bush.

It's funny, I disagree with Bush on almost EVERY policy but during the last few months I've gained a LOT of respect for Bush supporters themselves.

That's a real big problem I have with the Bush 'bashers' and Kerry 'haters'. Many of them haven't the foggiest idea why, but because it's the 'new thing' to do, they just go along with it. Someone comes along and says 'Bush Lied, War Is Wrong, blah blah...' and they empathize and take up the mantra without even noticing the headlines, much less the stories behind the headlines.

I don't mind debating politics and have deep respect for other opinions, even if they differ from my own, so long as they are educated opinions, and not mere repetition of a factoid or soundbyte given by some other source. I get ridiculed for sounding alot like Rush Limbaugh, yet I very seldom (about once or twice a month) even listen to him. given my career choice, it's hard to find him on the radio more often than not. I'm really not a big talk radio fan overall. It is nice to be compared to someone so admired by his audience, however.....

I actually came across this when doing that debate for Evolution. It's about the "psuedoscience" of Zogby polls and how they are largely biased.

Psuedoscience of Polling

I am not sure how one can show bias in the way the Presidential questions are asked. One should note however that only 1,220 likely voters were surveyed. I wouldn't count such a small sample a reliable poll. Nor is there much information about where the poll took place, how, what question(s) were asked etc.

After reading the article about Polling, one realizes that these questions are very important.

Actually, many polls are like that, generally polls are only taken among a couple thousand at best (usually a few hundred) and always with odd sounding numbers like 1224, or 446, or some such. Polls are generally unreliable in such things, and I only cited the poll as a news article, however the poll does show, and others have corroborated (sp?) that there is a clear disconnect between Kerry and the average voter. Sure he can energize half of his base at any one time, but he tends to alienate his base at the same time. Many of his supporters are, as I said, only behind him because of the electability of Bush's main opponent, not his charisma or platform.

National polling doesn't mean anything.

It's all about the college baby.

Check out www.Electoral-vote.com... for some EC stuff from the left.

Check out www.electionprojection.com... for some EC stuff from the right.

Yeah, national polls are essentially useless, especially when you take one only one into consideration. You have to look at the big picture...individual states.
www.electoral-vote.com... is a great place to see the big picture. When looking at those polls, also take into account the incumbent rule.

www.pollingreport.com...

Things really aren't looking that great for the Bush campaign right now. Here is my latest prediction map



[edit on 16-10-2004 by spngsambigpants]

You're assuming that Florida and Pennsylvania go Democrat, where the data I've seen suggests a race within the margin of error for PA and Bush with a significant (outside margin of error) lead in FL. Also, you have to consider the problem the Democrats have in states that they should have locked up long ago such as NJ and MI. PA counts there too. President Bush, traditionally, has no business having to campaign there, these states typically go to the Democrats, yet in this election, they are battleground states. You also have split Colorado according to popular vote, which is illegal and Colorado will not get away with it.

As much as the Democratic party tries, the law is still the law, and the electoral college will stand as it is, fair and accurate since the inception of the practice.

Originally posted by everlastingnoitall
You're assuming that Florida and Pennsylvania go Democrat, where the data I've seen suggests a race within the margin of error for PA and Bush with a significant (outside margin of error) lead in FL. Also, you have to consider the problem the Democrats have in states that they should have locked up long ago such as NJ and MI. PA counts there too. President Bush, traditionally, has no business having to campaign there, these states typically go to the Democrats, yet in this election, they are battleground states. You also have split Colorado according to popular vote, which is illegal and Colorado will not get away with it.

As much as the Democratic party tries, the law is still the law, and the electoral college will stand as it is, fair and accurate since the inception of the practice.

Averaging out the 3 most recent polls from Florida you get Bush and Kerry in a tie at 47%. I decided to give it to Kerry because of the incumbent rule and because of the New Englanders that begin to flock down to Florida at this time of year which the polls don't fully take into account. Looking at it now, I think I should have probably conservatively given it to Bush if not made it a toss-up. As for Pennsylvania where the polls consistently show a slight lead for Kerry (within the margin of error) or tie, I gave it to Kerry once again because of the incumbent rule.

As for Colorado, I am afraid you are mistaken. The proposed measure to split the state's electoral votes hasn't been passed yet. In addition, I don't understand why you think that splitting the votes is illegal, because how the electoral votes are assigned within the state has always been decided by the states themselves. All of the states except Nebraska and Maine have just used the winner-take-all system since the inception of the electoral college.

The Reuters/Zogby is nice but the CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll is showing Bush pulling away with an 8point lead among likely voters.

Link to Poll