OK, horse race fans, when last we picked up the story (September 3-5 Gallup poll), Bush had a one point lead on Kerry among RVs.
Today we have three different polls released covering about the same period with three pretty different horse race results.
1. CBS News, polling September 6-8 among RVs, gives Bush an 8 point lead.
2. ABC News/Washington Post, polling September 6-8 among RVs, gives Bush an estimated 4 point lead. Why do I say “estimated”? Because, now that Nader is becoming an ever-less-viable candidate, the WP poll has decided only to ask the three-way horse race question and not the followup for Nader voters that allows you to construct a 2-way race. Makes a lot of sense, right?
Since, in their last poll, the 2 way race knocked 2 points off Bush’s lead, I do the same thing in this poll and estimate that Bush’s 6 point lead in the 3 way race translates into a 4 point lead in the 2-way race.
3. Finally, Fox News, polling September 7-8 among LVs (no RV data available), gives Bush a 2 point lead.
Kinda confusing, huh? Why would September 6-8 be a better period for Bush than September 3-5, right after the convention? And could Fox’s polling period, which does not include September 6, mean they missed Bush’s best day and he was starting to go downhill a bit?
Stay tuned! There’ll be more polls coming at us shortly, I’m sure.
TDS Strategy Memos
Latest Research from:
Editor’s Corner
By Ed Kilgore
-
May 10: Comparing Antiwar Movements Past and Present
As a participant in anti-Vietnam War protests, I felt some clear comparisons to today’s antiwar protests was in order, so I wrote an assessment at New York:
For many a baby-boomer, the sights and sounds of student protests against U.S. complicity in Israel’s war in Gaza brought back vivid memories of the anti–Vietnam War movement of their youth and of the conservative backlash that ultimately placed its legacy in question. Some of today’s protestors consciously promote an identification with their forebears of the 1960s and 1970s. And some events — notably the huge deployments of NYPD officers at Columbia University 56 years to the day after police crushed an anti–Vietnam War protest at the school — are eerily evocative of that bygone era.
As someone who was involved in a minor way in the earlier protests (mostly as a member of the Student Mobilization Committee to End the War in Vietnam), I’m both fascinated by the comparisons and alert to the very big differences between the vast and nearly decadelong demonstrations against the Vietnam War and the nascent movement we’re seeing today. Here’s how they compare from several key perspectives.
Size: Gaza protests are smaller than anti-Vietnam demonstrations.
While early protests against Israeli military operations in Gaza were often centered in Arab American and Muslim American communities, the latest wave is principally college-campus-based, albeit widespread, as the Washington Post reported:
“The arrests of pro-Palestinian protesters at Columbia University on April 18 set off the latest wave of student activism across the country.
“The outbreak of nearly 400 demonstrations is the most widespread since the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel. From the Ivy League to small colleges, students have set up encampments and organized rallies and marches, with many demanding that their schools divest from Israeli corporations.”
The size of these protests has ranged from the hundreds into the thousands, but they can’t really be regarded as a mass phenomenon at this point.
There are, however, similarities to the earliest phase of the anti–Vietnam War movement: the campus-based “teach-ins” of 1965 (the year U.S. ground troops were first deployed in Vietnam). These began at the University of Michigan and then went viral, as a history compiled by students of the university recalled:
“The March 1965 teach-in at the University of Michigan inspired a wave of more than fifty similar teach-ins at universities around the nation and directly challenged the Johnson administration’s ability to shape public opinion about the War in Vietnam. At Columbia University, just two days after the UM event, professors held an all-night teach-in attended by 2,000 students …
“At UC-Berkeley, after an overflow crowd attended the initial UM-inspired teach-in, the Vietnam Day Committee organized a second outdoor event that drew 30,000 students.”
The anti–Vietnam War movement soon outgrew its campus origins as the war intensified and U.S. deployments soared. By 1967, monster rallies and marches were held in major cities — notably a New York march that attracted an estimated 400,000 to 500,000 protesters and a San Francisco rally that filled Kezar Stadium. At the New York event, the expansion of the antiwar movement to encompass elements of the civil-rights movement that had in part inspired the early protesters was exemplified by the participation of Martin Luther King Jr., who had just made his first overtly antiwar speech at Riverside Church.
By then the antiwar movement was beginning to attract support from a significant number of politicians, mostly Democrats but some Republicans.
The pro-Palestinian protest movement could eventually grow to this scale and breadth of support, but it hasn’t happened yet.
Durability: Gaza protests are new; anti–Vietnam War movement lasted a decade.
The fight to end American involvement in Vietnam lasted as long as the war itself; protests began in 1964, grew to include a mainstream congressional effort to cut off U.S. military aid, and continued as the South Vietnam regime collapsed in 1975. It had multiple moments of revived participation. Once such moment was Moratorium Day in October 1969, when an estimated 2 million Americans joined antiwar demonstrations once it became clear that Richard Nixon had no intention of ending the war begun by Lyndon Johnson. Another was the massive wave of protests in May 1970 when Nixon expanded the war into Cambodia; student walkouts and strikes occurred on around 900 college campuses and students were killed in Ohio and Mississippi.
It’s unclear whether the pro-Palestinian protests have anything like that kind of staying power. That’s a significant issue, since the goal shared by many protesters — a fundamental shift in the power relations between Israelis and Palestinians — could be harder to execute than an end to the Vietnam War.
Focus: Gaza protests have less clear-cut goals than Vietnam demonstrations.
Most pro-Palestinians protesters have embraced multiple demands and goals: an immediate permanent cease-fire in Gaza; termination of U.S. military assistance to Israel; and an end to Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories. Campus-based protesters have also called for termination of university investments in companies operating in Israel and, in some cases, closure of academic partnerships with Israeli institutions.
If this is going to become a sustained movement rather than a scattershot series of loosely connected local protests, some clarification of tangible goals will be necessary. Some of these aims are more achievable than others. If, for example, the Biden administration and the Saudis succeed in negotiating a significant cease-fire that temporarily ends the carnage in Gaza, does that take the wind of out of the sails of protesters seeking a definitive withdrawal of support for Israel? That’s unclear at this point.
For the most part, the anti–Vietnam War protest movement had one principal goal: the removal of U.S. military forces from Vietnam. Yes, factions of that movement expanded their goals to include such war-adjacent issues as university divestment from firms manufacturing weapons, closure of ROTC programs, draft resistance, and non-war-related issues like Black empowerment and anti-poverty efforts. But there was never much doubt that bringing the troops home was paramount.
Leadership: Gaza protests include more radical organizers.
One of the reasons for a perception of unfocused goals in the current wave of protests stems from organizers with more radical positions and rhetoric than some of their followers. As my colleague Jonathan Chait has pointed out, two major groups helping organize pro-Palestinian protests subscribe to ideologies incompatible with mainstream support:
“The main national umbrella group for campus pro-Palestinian protests is Students for Justice in Palestine. SJP takes a violent eliminationist stance toward Israel. In the wake of the October 7 terrorist attacks, it issued a celebratory statement instructing its affiliates that all Jewish Israelis are legitimate targets …
“A second group that has helped organize the demonstrations at Columbia is called Within Our Lifetime. Like SJP, WOL takes an uncompromising eliminationist stance toward Israel, even calling for ‘the abolition of zionism.’”
This was intermittently an issue in the anti–Vietnam War movement, particularly as such campus-based pioneers of protests as Students for a Democratic Society drifted into Marxist sectarianism. I vividly recall an antiwar march I attended in Atlanta in 1969 wherein the organizers (mostly from the Trotskyist Young Socialist Alliance) put Vietcong flags at either end of the march and controlled bullhorns bellowing slogans like “Ho Ho Ho Chi Minh / The NLF is gonna win,” referring to the communist insurgency in South Vietnam. This effectively turned a peace rally into something very different.
But over time, the extremist wing of the anti–Vietnam War movement went its own way, falling prey to fragmentation (the collapse of SDS into at least three factions that included the ultraviolent and Maoist Weatherman group epitomized its self-marginalization) and irrelevance. If the pro-Palestinian protest movement is to last, it needs to shed its more extreme elements.
Relevance: Gaza protests aren’t impacting U.S. politics as deeply.
There was never any doubt that anti–Vietnam War protesters were talking about something that vitally affected Americans, even if it took them a while to get on board. 2.7 million American citizens served in the Vietnam War with 58,000 losing their lives. 1.9 million young Americans were conscripted into the military during that war. While what Americans did to the people of Indochina wasn’t often called “genocide,” millions of Vietnamese, Cambodians, and Laotians perished at the hands of the U.S. and its allies, and the humanitarian disaster did increasingly trouble the consciences of many people not directly affected by the conflict. As many military leaders and reactionary politicians bitterly argued for decades, U.S. public opinion eventually ended the Vietnam War.
While the rise in sympathy for Palestinians and support for some sort of cease-fire has been palpable as deaths soar in Gaza, it remains unclear how invested Americans are in any sort of policy change toward the conflict. Yes, unhappiness with Joe Biden’s leadership in this area is a real political problem for him, but much of the unhappiness stems from conservatives (particularly conservative Evangelicals) who want stronger support for Israel. And the effort to make this issue an existential threat to Biden’s renomination during the 2024 Democratic primaries failed in contrast to the major role played by anti–Vietnam War sentiment in sidelining LBJ in 1968.
Making Gaza a crucial issue in American politics grows more challenging to the extent protesters choose more radical goals, like a single secular (i.e., non-Zionist) Palestinian state. And at the same time, more modest goals could undermine the strength and unity of the protest movement if protesters reject half-measures (much as anti–Vietnam War protesters rejected “Vietnamization,” phony peace talks, and other steps that prolonged the war).
Legacy: Gaza protests could provoke a similar backlash.
Arguably, the many sacrifices and eventual triumph of anti–Vietnam War protesters were more than offset by a conservative backlash that treated the “disorder” and alleged lack of patriotism associated with protests as a social malady to be remedied with heavy-handed repression. In the 1968 presidential election, Richard Nixon and George Wallace, the two candidates who engaged in law-and-order rhetoric and often espoused more violent steps to win the war, won 57 percent of the national popular vote. Other successful conservative politicians like Ronald Reagan made crackdowns on “coddled” student protesters a signature issue.
Today, Donald Trump and other Republicans are eagerly making pro-Palestinian protests part of a law-and-order message aimed at both student protesters and the “elite” faculty and administrators who are allegedly encouraging them. If protesters deliberately or inadvertently help Trump get back into the White House, they may soon encounter a U.S. administration that makes “Genocide Joe” Biden’s look like an oasis of pacific benevolence.
OK, let’s come to terms with this. Whether Kerry is behind 4-6 pts or tied, it doesn’t change the diagnosis. A large sector of americans are willing to accept the illusions of this administration. They may be stupid as Bel says, or psychologically distraught, but there is obviously a disconnect between people in a large swath of america and the industrialized cosmopolitan areas on the coasts. I keep recalling this crazy quote in an LA Times story about a Tulsa woman asserting that she is better off now than 3 years ago, even though the family took a 40% pay cut. Why? Because they are now “living within our means”! OK, it OKlahoma. I know, but this is the level of thinking that is going on across the red states. In the WaPo poll released yesterday a clear majority expressed the opinion that Bush would be better than Kerry in relations with foreign leaders. Meanwhile 75% of europe wants to distance itself from the US. What world are we living in!? I think we need to come to grips with a scary reality that most americans are not like the people who spend time on the internet. They are ill-informed and naive. They don’t want to have to think about issues. The president says he will do whatever it takes to keep them safe and that’s good enough for them. Frank Rich in the NYT summed it up pretty well. Bush may not be a tough, hard as nail, war hero commander. But he plays one on TV. That’s what americans understand. We are captivated by the Rambo culture. Things don’t always work out in our favor but the culture has discovered that action movies, schwarzenegger, stallone and bruce willis can go a long way to comforting us and propping up the illusion. Let’s face it, whether Kerry or Bush win in November this problem exists. 9/11 was simply a catalyst to propel the country into a psycho-social dependence on the illusion of invincibility created by our media and entertainment industry. Orwell has finally arrived.
Simon, if you had ever been involved in a campaign and weren’t simply talking out your ass, you might get it.
I’m talking to those with some concept of politics. You’re not in that group. Losers like you show up wailing and wringing their hands every week, and they never accomplish anything.
Get outta my way, I’m busy here.
Howard Dean??! Speaking of delusional, Simon…
I have to agree with Jeff: AWOL and Kitty Kelley are useless stories. Bush passed that test in 2000. The voters don’t like his past but they have forgiven him. Just like the had forgiven Clinton for his shenanigans.
Every day we talk about cocaine or the National Guard we don’t talk about the winning issues for Kerry. I’m just as angry as you are about the lying Swifties’ attack. But the only way we can fight that is by fast responses and an immediate changing of the issues. There’s plenty to use: the war, corruption, the economy, Bush’s broken promises.
Gabby Hayes, you are a cock-eyed optimist. Get your head out of the sand. Ruy is spinning this big time! It’s his job, he has to keep the faithful motivated. These polls are bad news and the sooner we recognize that Kerry is screwing this up the better off we’ll be. Where are you Howard Dean?
Here’s what I’m worried about. Back in June, Ruy was saying on Joshua Micah Marshall’s site that Fox was a crap poll and he’d trust Gallup any day. Now we’re hanging our hat on the Fox poll (and Rasmussen!). Are we deperate or what?
I’m also worried that some Kerry idiot staffer forged those docs that Dan Rather stupidly went with in the 60 Minutes story on Wednesday. That will sink him immediately. We could use a little less help from the “liberal media”.
Kerry’s running a crap campaign and if he doesn’t get it together we are going to lose big, let’s not kid ourselves. We need to stop pretending to be something we are not and run as proud liberals! Let the chips fall where they may.
The AWOL story is stupid and distracts everyone – especially Kerry – from talking about the real issues.
I for one hate Vietnam more than ever.
I still think that Rove is over rated but its very interesting that the bush club is running this campaign based on an assumption that the americans are stupid. Its even more interesting to note that they actually believe that americans are stupid and they spout it on their platforms everyday.
For instance, Cheney implies that a vote for Kerry will mean another terrorist strike… but he seems not to realise that americans are aware on whose watch 9/11 took place.
What is more, what if an attack did happen before Nov 2., what would that mean for his team? Is he therefore implying that no such attack can happen under their watch? Americans cant be that simplistic in their view on these elections. I suppose if the electorate voted for Kerry, then it would be the electorate’s fault if something happened.
In like manner, Bush is continually croaking that things are better and that america is safer. Americans must be smart enough to realise that Bush is spewing crap. Surely they know if their salaries buy less, if insurance has gone up, if medical costs have risen… surley they know how safe they feel and they must know how they feel about kerry’s record and Bush’ records.
I dont think that there are many people who can say positive things about their lives since bush took over but yet, this bush club invites the electorate to elect them because things are looking up.
Americans must be stupid to swallow the nonsense and rhetoric being dished out by Rove and crew. Its really a shame that these people would run an entire campaign based on how stupid they think the american populace is. What a pity.
It’s not an “either/or” proposition. There are multiple messages going on to multiple audiences. Striking at Bush’s strengths is sound strategy, and a necessary one. All the praise heaped on him has to be answered, and one way is to show he’s been a lying screw off who used government privilege his entire life.
If the DEMs insist on using this Bush reocrds thing, then they have to put a specific perspective on it and push that perspective to its logical conclusion.
They could probably tie it to Bush’ claim about those who are being non-patriotic for not going with him on the war… they can also say that there is none more unpatritic than bush, who refused to serve his country, effectively.
Of course there are other perspectives… but they need to find a valid one and push it.
I agree Jim.. In any event, the DEMS dont have the psychy required to push such an issue in a way that benefits them. The wheels will fall off in the DEMS hands..
Kerry is gaining traction by his approach of linking Iraq with every other failed Bush policy
I’m not so sure that the Bush/National Guard story having legs is such a good thing. Like with the Swift Boat crap, it moves attention away from the real issues on which Bush is particularly vulnerable–like the economy and health care. The USA Today Thursday says the issue of most importance to voters in the battleground states is the economy. That’s where Kerry ought to be hammering Bush.
Debunking Wall Street Loves Bush for President:
The Fox News phony Business panel has been trying to sell the notion that Wall Street loves Bush, and that Wall Street would react positively to the alleged Bush surge.
Bushit.
A week ago, the Dow opened at 10,290 on Friday following Bush’s acceptance speech. It dropped last Friday to 10,260. All weekend the alleged 11 points lead was touted, and Fox Business opined Monday that Wall Street should respond positively to the news that Bush was far out in front. The Dow is right back where it started a week ago, at 10,289.
Tuesday the markets opened UP, largely on the strength of good oil news in the form of the Monday sell off by “speculators,” (probably Saudi royals trading on insider info) followed by Bandar’s October Delivery of promised cheap oil.
Wednesday the market retreated some, as it became apparent that demand for oil will remain strong, and that retreat continued Thursday. I think tomorrow we will see a sell-off, and the market will close DOWN.
Get ready for TERROR to be the Bush campaign theme again.
The bogus, contrived Bounce is just about gone.
The economy is stagnant and staggering, the Bush bounce is bogus, and Bush desperately needs to distract from his Guard woes.
We’re about to have a TERROR alert whether we need one or not. We got one when Kerry picked Edwards, and when he got the convention bounce.
Yep, TERROR alert coming, probably tomorrow AFTER the market closes.
September 7 is when the 1,000th U.S. military death occurred in Iraq, so the closer race in the Fox News poll may be a reaction to this sad milestone.
******************************
Just now:
Zogby nails it on Scarborough, with Pat Buchanan setting it up.
He addressed the overweight of pubs and underweighting of Dems.
Very good analysis, and the first time I’ve heard it stated the way we’ve been talking about it for days.
Let’s go canvassing, and tell everybody that Kerry is going to win by a landslide.
I feel much better when I do this instead of waching talk shows and reading newspapers.
It’s not that 9/6 was a good day for Bush, its that his bounce started to dissipate on 9/7. Why? The media reported the death of our 1,000 soldier in Iraq on 9/7.
One other point to make — the national election that you are all polling is not going to happen. Bush is campaigning as if he can win with the popular vote. Crushing Kerry with his base in the south and Utah is not going to win it — Ohio, Florida, and the states Gore squeaked through with in 2000 will. Given the skewed support for Bush in his strong states, I think he’s got to be 4 points ahead nationally to be ahead on election day — he’s really running a dumb campaign. But he did that in 2000 as well, when he blew the lead at the end by concentrating on California, but got saved by Scalia.
correction – Bush’s ‘approval’ never dropped below 47%.
56% better off or the same, 42% not as well off as in 2001.
REALLY? Where the hell are all these unemployed they keep talking about?
I think premature public panic amongDems is worth a couple of points to Bush. There’s still plenty of time, and I don’t think anyone who was undecided on August 1 or 31 — and that’s still plenty of people — has definitively committe themselves.
However, a steady drumbeat from Dems that we’re doomed will do it.
Nick, I know the ABC poll oversampled Dems a bit after the DNC, so they tend to fluctuate apparently.
BTW, Danielle can crow all she wants, but if she knows anything about political history she should be aware that bounces do subside. Just wait another week or so.
More on WaPo:
Bush favorables never went below 47%. Significant majorities believe they are better of of the same as in 2001 and believe Iraq was worth it.
Who would do a better job with relations with other countries:
Bush 47 Kerry 42 !!!
Both RVs and LVs are LEANED, as they were in other polls showing big leads.
Everything about this poll suggests it is not representative of the electorate.
The bottom line is yes, B/C ahead in the horse race. By how much? Who knows, but it’s not comforting. I’ll reserve judgement till I see how all the dirt shaking out on Bush affects next round of polls.
1) If you study the internals of both national and state polls over the past few weeks, there is one consistent and undeniable fact: Kerry’s “unfavorable” rating has been increasing quite a bit. There is only a slight improvement in Bush’s “favorable” rating. People aren’t suddenly big on Bush, but more and more are getting grumpy on Kerry.
2) There is good evidence that “likely voter” models work, but only for the final polls in the last 72 hours of the race. No one has any idea if LV really works at all before then, people assume it is sensible and use it, but they could easily be totally wrong.
September 6th was Labor Day. Perhaps more Republicans were at home on Labor Day.
Hi, lurker here.
I’ve been following this site for some time now, and I have a question about polling. If, as some of you have said, the recent Time and Newsweek polls have a republican bias, and are therefore irrevelent, did they have the same republican bias in the past? And if so, wouldn’t all their previous polls therefore be irrelevent as well? Did they show Kerry with a lead? If so, you have to admit that Bush has really moved up in the polls.
Frankly, sometimes I think your analysis of recent polls is bordering on wishful thinking.
Don’t get me wrong – I’m no troll. I’m hoping for Kerry victory as much as all of you, but I’m getting a bit despondent. Prove me wrong!!
dont let up ruy. You are doing a great job. S
There is no doubt that Kerry’s negatives are up as a result of the August and since attacks.
But those negatives have not translated into new voters for Bush. Gallup has had Bush at the same 50-52 for 6 weeks. It’s overstated, but it’s been there and hasn’t increased more than one point in all that time.
I would analogize this to a football game that is tied, but the Bush team is being given big props by the TV commentators for their recent drive, which may or may not end up in a score, and hasn’t changed the score yet.
According to your average of polls, Bush is ahead 4 to 5 points.Although I do understand your concern regarding Kerry’s postion in the polls as I do, Football Madman, I think we need to remember a few points:
1.Where did any of us realistically think Bush would be one week out of his convention? If you did not think Bush would get aleast a small bounce then something is definitely wrong in our thinking regarding elections.
2.Kerry has finally got his mojo, he’s mad and he’s hired on some pros-especially Clinton people.
3. The stories and stats favor Kerry right now. Think about it – the job numbers, the deficit numbers, 1000 dead in Iraq, the new poverty and healthcare numbers. Now Kerry just needs to use them.
3.Bush had his best week last week.
4.The negative ads from ourside (Texans for Truth) are starting.
5. Bush’s awol story and coverup seems to have legs.
6.The Bush camp seems scared for an incumbant- why else would they have Cheney say what he said yesterday regarding terrorists??
7. Gore was much further down than this in 2000 and came up to win the popular vote.
Now, usually I am not a optimist, and I still feel this will be really close, but I still feel we can pull up and win.
The only way I will say Bush is definitely going to win is if one of two things happen. Either Bin Ladin is found or a new terrorist attack occurs in the U.S. Then Kerry is history.
My favorite question from the WaPo poll:
24a. Overall do you think Bush has done more to (unite the country), or has done more to (divide the country)?
Unite Divide No opin.
9/8/04 RV 48 44 8
I’s say were pretty divided on that question.
Seriously though, this poll shows a dramatic drop in Kerry’s and small rise in Bush’s favorable rating. So either the negative attacks in August have been effective or this sample group is distorted to the right.
CBS: Bush leads 49% to 42%
ABC: Bush leads 52% to 43%
Fox: Bush leads 47% to 45%
Gallup: Bush leads 52% to 45%
Rasmussen: Bush leads 48% to 47%
ICR Bush leads 48% to 47%
Rather than average these, which gives a result based upon badly conformed polls, break it down:
CONTRIVED POLLS
CBS……. Bush leads 49% to 42%
ABC …….Bush leads 52% to 43%
Gallup … Bush leads 52% to 45%
CLOSER TO RIGHT
Fox …………….Bush leads 47% to 45%
Rasmussen …. Bush leads 48% to 47%
ICR …………… Bush leads 48% to 47%
================================
What does this snapshot tell us?
It tells us that the polls which find a big Bush lead have a real problem in WHO they are polling, and HOW such responses are WEIGHTED.
It tells us they are contriving a result, and pushing it hard.
It is also unprecedented.
I think Ruy is going to spin these polls right into defeat for Kerry and himself…god, the man is self-delusional..no wonder the Demos are sinking….
Ruy is right on top of this, and like anything with complexity, it’s hard to understand what is happening until you see it.
There are polls being taken and reported.
1. Some are changing their reporting methods in order to eliminate or undervalue the much more pro Kerry Registered Voter.
2. Some are grossly overpolling non Democrats.
3. Some are using weights to determine Likely Voters which are contrived and not supported by history.
4. Some are altering their approach in the past 6 weeks in order to GET a more favorable Bush result.
5. The polls which are most accurate show it very close in percentages and electoral vote.
6. The polls which are most inaccurate are those which are being pushed by corporate media.
7. It’s difficult to know this without studying the polls in detail and delineating what is happening in each one.
If someone told you they jumped 7 feet high, you’d better know if they were using a trampolene to get there before you conclude the person is an Olympian.
There was one more poll this week: The Economist has Bush up by 1. That would make the average of these seven polls a 4-point lead for Bush, which seems plausible to me.
Missouri is red according to the latest polls… very red.
Here’s a rundown of this week’s polls:
CBS: Bush leads 49% to 42%
ABC: Bush leads 52% to 43%
Fox: Bush leads 47% to 45%
Gallup: Bush leads 52% to 45%
Rasmussen: Bush leads 48% to 47%
ICR Bush leads 48% to 47%
Overall average: Bush leads 49.3% to 44.8%
I’m not sure what the significance of running ads in 14 rather than 20 states is. He could be saving money for October. Couldn’t that also be a sign he doesn’t need to spend a lot of money in blue states? About half the national polls show Bush with a nice lead and the other half show no lead at all. It does make one’s head spin.
Ruy, I like your blog but I think you’re being overly optimistic. I think Kerry is in real serious trouble right now. He trails in the CBS and Wash Post polls by anywhere from 8 to 9 points. He is only running advertisements in 14 battleground states and he even pulled his ads in Missouri. It’s far from over but I’m getting pretty concerned right now.
I’m not sure about the RV sample, but the LV sample in the ABC/WaPo poll has 6 percent more Repubs than Dems, which means it’s skewed, just like with the Time and Newsweek polls.