NationStates Jolt Archive

Well, I usually don't put too much stock in polls.. which, even when accurate overall, rarely predict voter turnout. That said, I figure Bush's modest lead (3% or so) will translate into a moderately-large (5%+) electoral victory on Tues... However, I never figured, especially after seeing cable news coverage of early voting (describing voters as "angry" or voicing "discontent," true or not) that Bush would be leading among those who have already voted by any margin at all.

Honestly, I expected Kerry to easily take early voters, with Bush winning overall regardless. That's why this stuff seemed to come out of left field...
_________

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/31/opinion/polls/main652496.shtml

Bush up 8 among early voters.

And:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=213161&page=1

Bush up 3 among early voters.
_________

Am I the only one shocked by this? Weren't early voters supposed to be the more partisan, more angry group? :confused:

Similarly, in NYT/CBS:

John Kerry, favorability: 41% favorable, 47% unfavorable, versus President Bush, favorability: 48% favorable, 41% unfavorable.

Undecided voters responded for President Bush 50%-47%, same as with the Pew results.....

(Here's the part I actually DID expect (hooray for me ;) ))

66% of Bush voters strongly support Bush.

50% of Kerry voters strongly support Kerry.

Also, "right decision/wrong decision" on Iraq is 53%-42%.

Anyhow, I'll shut up now, but I had to say something about the way early voting has been reported on the news, versus the actual numbers for early voting. I guess perception isn't reality on this one, eh? :p

I'm not so sure about that myself. Those polls only measured the opinions of "likely voters", and a likely voter is usually picked out by voting almost every time in the past. However, I get the strong sensation that there will be overwhelming numbers of new voters coming to the polls this year, and those voters are going to skew heavily Kerry.

I'm not so sure about that myself. Those polls only measured the opinions of "likely voters", and a likely voter is usually picked out by voting almost every time in the past. However, I get the strong sensation that there will be overwhelming numbers of new voters coming to the polls this year, and those voters are going to skew heavily Kerry.

I know Kerry supporters are hoping for the 18-25 year demographic to save them (it won't), but early voters?

I don't think the overall poll results are going to predict turnout, you're right. However, assuming people that responded that they already voted actually did, that'd be the opposite, a Bush lead, than the networks imply in their coverage of early voting.. that's all I meant.. you can find a poll to tell you just about anything this year, but the Early Voter numbers just seemed way off from the news I've read and seen on T.V.. I just thought that was interesting, seeing as we've apparently got a turnout election on our hands. ;)

I know Kerry supporters are hoping for the 18-25 year demographic to save them (it won't), but early voters?

I don't think the overall poll results are going to predict turnout, you're right. However, assuming people that responded that they already voted actually did, that'd be the opposite, a Bush lead, than the networks imply in their coverage of early voting.. that's all I meant.. you can find a poll to tell you just about anything this year, but the Early Voter numbers just seemed way off from the news I've read and seen on T.V.. I just thought that was interesting, seeing as we've apparently got a turnout election on our hands. ;)

Well no, actually I think it makes good sense. Most of Kerry's support is going to come in the form of first-time voters who've never gone to the polling precinct before, let alone filled out an absentee ballot or early voted. That's more for the dedicated voter, and dedicated voters are more the Republican's province.

Am I the only one shocked by this? Weren't early voters supposed to be the more partisan, more angry group? :confused:
There are plenty of partisan angry Republicans. In 2000, Bush led in some early voting states, then lost on Election Day. In other states, Gore was leading in early voting, then lost on Election Day.

The news sources also say early voters include more elderly folk (Republicans, most likely) than in the general voting population.

There are plenty of partisan angry Republicans. In 2000, Bush led in some early voting states, then lost on Election Day. In other states, Gore was leading in early voting, then lost on Election Day.

The news sources also say early voters include more elderly folk (Republicans, most likely) than in the general voting population.

Alright... I'm willing to admit my ignorance on the entire subject of early voting trends.. :) but I still maintain that, since my beliefs about the norms of early voting are based on what I've read and seen on t.v., which have told me, basically, that it's a Democrat game at the polls, pre Nov. 2., something aint right.. Also, since some states vote early for the first time ever, I figured their reporting was somewhat less likely to be biased, since they're reporting a new trend, not based on history... maybe I ask too much.. :(

Aren't early votes mainly absentees... which is mostly military?

Aren't early votes mainly absentees... which is mostly military?

Early voting and absentee are different, in this definition. Early voters are people who have gone to polling places, while absentee voters send in their ballots via mail. Absentee voters are more often Republican, but early voters were, according to t.v., angry democrats (supposedly). Also, the military is a tiny fraction of the overall absentee vote, although they're a small but significant percentage of the overseas vote.

Oh, thanks for clearing that up.

z.. I figured their reporting was somewhat less likely to be biased, [...] maybe I ask too much.. :(
Er, you expected unbiased media reporting....hope springs eternal huh? ;)

BUSH TO KERRY!!!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v293/grunt74/BUSH.gif

VOTE FOR MIKE BADNARIK U FOOLS!!!!

shoot

BUSH TO KERRY!!!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v293/grunt74/BUSH.gif

VOTE FOR MIKE BADNARIK U FOOLS!!!!

Huh? Is that the wrong picture? :fluffle:

what no

I strangely agree with TPM, but not with his spelling.

Just for reference:

www.badnarik.org

That's funny as hell. I wonder how many people on other forums are now using that as their avatar? :p

As a pro-American European I find it so embarrassing that a grimacing ninny like Bush can be taken seriously over there. Is this something to do with the collapse of the American public education system? I think he only appeals to people with very underdeveloped intellects and very unsophisticated understanding of the world outside the USA.

As a pro-American European I find it so embarrassing that a grimacing ninny like Bush can be taken seriously over there. Is this something to do with the collapse of the American public education system? I think he only appeals to people with very underdeveloped intellects and very unsophisticated understanding of the world outside the USA.

That's cute. :rolleyes: ;)

Sorry but Bush comes across as mentally retarded. I mean people with mental disabilities should be helped but not voted into positions with serious political responsibilities.

As a pro-American European I find it so embarrassing that a grimacing ninny like Bush can be taken seriously over there. Is this something to do with the collapse of the American public education system? I think he only appeals to people with very underdeveloped intellects and very unsophisticated understanding of the world outside the USA.

You haven't been over here to the US recently, have you? An estimated third of our 9th graders can't find Canada on a map.

The problem with polls is that most of them require people to send things back in to whoever is taking the poll, so it doesn't really mean anything at all. All it really means is that more Republican Early Voters who are willing to fill out the survey and send it in than Democrats.

You haven't been over here to the US recently, have you? An estimated third of our 9th graders can't find Canada on a map.

I'm sorry, but that's just damn funny....true or not.

Sorry but Bush comes across as mentally retarded. I mean people with mental disabilities should be helped but not voted into positions with serious political responsibilities.

Ironically enough they were talking about this very thing on Larry King last night. Polls show that under educated women have broken for Bush and the educated women are going for Kerry. Same with men. While Bush has more support by men over all then Kerry, the gap is smaller then last time (2000) the men that have broken from Bush and moved to Kerry are educated men. By uneducated this meant only high school or lower. Which is amazing to me because it would appear that they would be voting against their own interests. Since Kerry's is offering far more to poor people then Bush is.. being uneducated usually dictates how much money you also earn, unless you get lucky and win the lottery..lol. So I found the poll quite strange, although I suspect the more uneducated voter may not be up on the issues as much as the educated voter, which would explain a lot.

Or it was a fake... wait, CNN. Right :)

Or it was a fake... wait, CNN. Right :)

It was on Larry King which is on CNN, but the poll was not conducted by CNN. I believe it was a Newsweek poll.

I've only looked at the CBS report, but it seems to be looking at a very small subset of the overall polling group. The total sample was 920, of which 20% have already voted, so we're talking about a 51-43 split in a polling sample of less than 200. The MOE on a sample size that big is enormous.

Apparently, the preponderance of places that allow early voting are Republican, and according to this story (I cannot vouch for the source) Bush's numbers are down in those areas, even though he still leads overall

http://www.mydd.com/story/2004/10/26/18411/226