Blogs for Bush - Arrrgh! Polling
The really cool bit of polling lately has been the Mason-Dixon poll of my great State of Nevada - 'cause it shows the President ahead of Kerry 52% to 42%; the President squeeked to a win here in 2000 and thus it was largely due to my personal efforts that President Bush got Nevada's then-4 electoral votes and the Presidency. He'll get 5 from us this time, though I'll likely play a smaller personal part as so many of my fellow Nevadan's are chomping at the bit to vote for him.
But the polls, as I'm sure everyone is aware, have been all over the place - with the one exception being that no series of polls have shown Kerry in the lead since late August. The Real Clear Politics chart shows the average of the aggregate - and the President has been consistently ahead since Labor Day. Traditionally, there has been a word for a candidate who has been behind consistently since Labor Day: Toast. Still, there's just too much at stake in this election - so, its better to be dreadfully afraid that Kerry, via massive ballot-box stuffing and legal shennanigans, might just pull it off. Better to be on edge and working hard, right?
On the other hand, don't let 'em grind you down. We're going to be pelted over the next 10 days with all sorts of entirely bogus information - most of it generated out of the DNC and/or Kerry/Edwards. The purpose of this is to pump up flagging Donk's, depress eager Republicans and generally cloud the issue in the hopes that by hook or crook Kerry will come in close enough for the Donk lawyers to take over. An example of this sort of chicanery is the recent Harris Poll - I'm sure you heard of it. By their traditional (and highly accurate) measurement, President Bush is comfortably ahead 51% to 43%, but by a new methodology, the President's lead shrink to 48% to 46%. Daly Thoughts takes on this poll and gives us an excellent bit of insight into its underlying rationale:
"Harris, however, states there are indications that many of those who fit the description of having been of voting age in 2000 but did not vote then may actually vote this time. As such, they provided a different likely voter screen, which removed the restriction that those who were of voting age in 2000 had actually voted. History has shown that people fitting this description are much less likely to vote, even if they say they are certain to vote; this is why the likely voter screen that omits them has proven to be accurate in the past. The revised Harris likely voter screen treats them just as likely to vote. From the writeup, I note that there were 820 respondants in the likely voter sample using the revised method, as compared to 755 in the traditional method. If the traditional method works for normal turnout, then the implication is that these other voters, the delta between the samples, represent voters who may turn out above and beyond the normal turnout. Under this turnout scenerio, the turnout will be 108.6% of the normal turnout. That 8.6% works out to 9.8 million voters above normal turnout. (Please note that Kerry would, according to the Harris data, get most, but not all, of these voters.)
How feasible is this?
The highest turnout in recent memory was in 1992, thanks in part to Ross Perot’s appeal. If we assume the normal growth rate in turnout from one election to the next, then given the votes cast in 1988, in 1992 there should have been about 98.6 million votes cast. The actual count was 104.4 million. That difference, 5.8 million, was above what would normally be expected. It represented 5.56% of the total vote that year. By comparison, if there really is going to be 9.8 million voters above normal this year, the additional voters would be 7.93% of the total vote.
Maybe there are nearly 10 million people, aged 22 and over, who did not vote in 2000 but are going to this year. Maybe there is such antipathy towards George W. Bush that will bring voters out even more than the candidacy of Ross Perot did. We’ll know in less than two weeks. If there are, then the Harris poll suggests that Kerry is in the ballpark. If these votes do not materialize, the Harris poll suggests that it will be a short night a week from Tuesday."
Take what you want out of the polls - if you're the nervous type, only look at those polls which make you feel better; it doesn't matter because, in the end, its who shows up to vote that counts - just remember, Remember, REMEMBER - its turnout, Turnout, TURNOUT that drives things in 2004. For God's sake, whatever you do, don't get lazy. |
