The W
Views: 99985494
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
24.10.14 0800
The W - Current Events & Politics - CNN: Dean Within 5 Pts of Bush
This thread has 7 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 6.13
Pages: 1
(1585 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (13 total)
spf
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 11 days
Last activity: 3 days
AIM:  
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.89
While obviously it is impossible to prognosticate what will happen 11 months from now, I do think this CNN.com poll (cnn.com) has some interesting results for both the upcoming Dem primary season and the possible general election. According to this, in head to heads with any possible Dem candidate Dean wins by no less than 16 (48-32 vs. Clark is his closest race). Also it says in the general right now it would be Bush 51, Dean 46. Considering how so many folks on both sides of the fence seem determined to push the mantra that Dean A) will fracture the Democratic party and B) Dean will get slaughtered like Horace Greeley meets George McGovern and they have Walter Mondale's love child. Seems to me that the Dems are lining up behind Dean (he has endorsements from both major 2000 candidates now) and that the 2004 race isn't at this point looking to be the nightmare that the GOP is hoping it will be for the Dems. Also of interest in the article, Clinton was down 20 to Bush 41 in head-to-heads at this point...just something to think about.



Toil not to gain wealth, cease to be concerned about it. Proverbs 23:4

blogforamerica.com
Promote this thread!
ParagonOfVirtue
Salami








Since: 20.8.03
From: New Jersey, USA

Since last post: 3325 days
Last activity: 3005 days
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.79
Even if the election were today, this poll would still mean absolutely nothing, let alone the actual election in Nov like you said. But for the desperate optimist that I am regarding the 2004 election, I can't help but take this as pretty decent news.

Much has been said about the lack of electability of Dean due to what he is being portrayed as a more left candidate. I'm beginning to think this could mean a few things. One is that this constant talk of how Dean isn't electable and how Bush is unbeatable is actually backfiring on the Republicans. What they are doing is perhaps making 25-30% of voters even more hardcore against everything Dean stands for, but for the rest of the centrist voters, this just adds credibility to the Howard Dean name. And for the voters to know a name is essential right now, because if you remember, four months ago, the criticism coming after the nine Democrats was that they are all a bunch of no-names. With Dean becoming more and more a household name, the talk is no longer about Gore or Hillary jumping in or about how the current nine Dems suck, but rather about Dean himself. And for most of the centrist population, many who are totally open to not voting for Bush in '04, this could be a good thing.
redsoxnation
Scrapple








Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 480 days
Last activity: 480 days
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.34
You'd think after 2000 the pollsters would realize this is not a national election but a federal election and that a national poll means nothing. Put polls in the field in the key swing states in terms of the electoral college, and if those are close, then its a race.
I can see the math of a Democrat getting to 270, but (fake)Dean is not that Democrat.



If only Paul Jones had brought in General Skandar Akbar as a technical military advisor, Paul Jones' Army could have thwarted the McMahon infidels and prevented the collapse of wrestling civilization.
AWArulz
Knackwurst








Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 20 hours
Last activity: 20 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.72
    Originally posted by spf2119
    this CNN.com poll has some interesting results for both the upcoming Dem primary season and the possible general election. According to this, in head to heads with any possible Dem candidate Dean wins by no less than 16 (48-32 vs. Clark is his closest race). Also it says in the general right now it would be Bush 51, Dean 46.


Pretty interesting numbers.

Matthew Dowd, President Bush's pollster, suggests that once a democratic nominee becomes clear, and obviously, Dean is the man right now, that his prediction was that President Bush's lead would narrow and they might even fall behind. He said this on election day, back in November.

http://www.cnn.com/ 2003/ALLPOLITICS/11/03/ elec04.prez.bush.memo/ index.html

What I think is a more telling poll is this one:
http://www.cnn.com/ 1999/ALLPOLITICS/stories/ 12/22/poll.cnn/index.html
from December of 1999, when George Bush was also the more or less foregone candidate, though McCain and others were still in. He led Gore in a poll by 10 points, and I think we all knew where that race ended up. I'm not sure there were 10 votes difference.

I think this one,
http://www.data.historycentral.com/elections/ 1992.html
is sobering for us who are conservative. Dubya's Daddy held a commanding lead in the polls in 1992 and lost to some unknown governor from some backwater state, (sound familiar)






Rasslin' republicans - visit it soon
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1270 days
Last activity: 1067 days
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
The poll sample size is too small for a national race...



evilwaldo
Lap cheong








Since: 7.2.02
From: New York, NY

Since last post: 3408 days
Last activity: 3189 days
AIM:  
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
    Originally posted by spf2119
    While obviously it is impossible to prognosticate what will happen 11 months from now, I do think this CNN.com poll (cnn.com) has some interesting results for both the upcoming Dem primary season and the possible general election. According to this, in head to heads with any possible Dem candidate Dean wins by no less than 16 (48-32 vs. Clark is his closest race). Also it says in the general right now it would be Bush 51, Dean 46. Considering how so many folks on both sides of the fence seem determined to push the mantra that Dean A) will fracture the Democratic party and B) Dean will get slaughtered like Horace Greeley meets George McGovern and they have Walter Mondale's love child. Seems to me that the Dems are lining up behind Dean (he has endorsements from both major 2000 candidates now) and that the 2004 race isn't at this point looking to be the nightmare that the GOP is hoping it will be for the Dems. Also of interest in the article, Clinton was down 20 to Bush 41 in head-to-heads at this point...just something to think about.



If we learned anything from the 2000 election it is that polls like this are useless. It is about electoral votes, not popularity. I would be more interested in seeing a poll from each state.





mmmmmm, Breakfast (x-entertainment.com)
DrOp
Frankfurter








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 2235 days
Last activity: 1102 days
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.23
    Originally posted by Grimis
    The poll sample size is too small for a national race...


Not really. As long as they have a representative sample, the basic rules of inferential statistics apply and they can infer the sample resonse averages back on the overall population.

The only major difference that sample size would make in a poll like this is the error term. Larger sample, smaller error term.



And Marking Out
Slashwrestling.com
Wienerville
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1270 days
Last activity: 1067 days
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
    Originally posted by DrOp
    Not really. As long as they have a representative sample, the basic rules of inferential statistics apply and they can infer the sample resonse averages back on the overall population.

    The only major difference that sample size would make in a poll like this is the error term. Larger sample, smaller error term.
Inferential statistics are true here, but generally speaking 600 likely voters is awfully small, and I'd be uncomfortable using it in a statewide race.

I've got a friend who is a pollster(being from Baltimore, you've heard of him)and he uses a higher number of likely votes for cogressional and state races than just 600. 1400 is about the optimal size for a national poll.



DrOp
Frankfurter








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 2235 days
Last activity: 1102 days
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.23
    Originally posted by Grimis
      Originally posted by DrOp
      Not really. As long as they have a representative sample, the basic rules of inferential statistics apply and they can infer the sample resonse averages back on the overall population.

      The only major difference that sample size would make in a poll like this is the error term. Larger sample, smaller error term.
    Inferential statistics are true here, but generally speaking 600 likely voters is awfully small, and I'd be uncomfortable using it in a statewide race.

    I've got a friend who is a pollster(being from Baltimore, you've heard of him)and he uses a higher number of likely votes for cogressional and state races than just 600. 1400 is about the optimal size for a national poll.


Not disagreeing with the idea of using a larger sample. Here is what the article said at the bottom:

    The poll included interviews with 1,004 adult Americans, including 399 registered voters who described themselves as Democrats. It was conducted by telephone on December 30 and January 1.

    Of them, 604 said they were likely voters. Because of weighting, that would translate into an estimated 51-percent turnout in the November general election.

    The survey's questions have error margins of plus or minus 3 to 5 percentage points.






And Marking Out
Slashwrestling.com
Wienerville
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1270 days
Last activity: 1067 days
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
I saw the bottom, and that's what I based the 600 off of. They got 1004 respondants, not 1004 likely voters, which is why I have a problem wth the data.



DrOp
Frankfurter








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 2235 days
Last activity: 1102 days
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.23
You know that they don't ask if you are planning to vote until the end of the survey, right?



And Marking Out
Slashwrestling.com
Wienerville
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1270 days
Last activity: 1067 days
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
    Originally posted by DrOp
    You know that they don't ask if you are planning to vote until the end of the survey, right?

Yes



Freeway
Scrapple








Since: 3.1.02
From: Calgary

Since last post: 306 days
Last activity: 3 days
#13 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.96
As cliche as it sounds, there's still a whole lot of season left to play. There's so many X factors [the war, the economy, etc] that nobody can guess if Bush's approval rating will still be as high come November, or if Dean will still be giving us such crazy newsitems.



FLAMES: 21-12-3-3 for 48 points
It took the team until March 5th to get 21 wins last year
Thread rated: 6.13
Pages: 1
Thread ahead: Dean shows them retirees who's boss
Next thread: Democratic Primary Debates
Previous thread: Mad Cow came from Canada
(1585 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Grimis sez: DMC sez: You two are fucking pathetic. "According to estimates from UNAIDS, an umbrella group for five U.N. agencies, the World Bank and the World Health Organization, 34.3 million people in the world have AIDS -- 24.
- Gavintzu, The Politics of AIDS (2003)
The W - Current Events & Politics - CNN: Dean Within 5 Pts of BushRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.127 seconds.