Hmmm… did the Bush Administration just award an exclusive contract to Diebold to provide electronic voting machines for the 2004 election?
We’ve got three W-Th-F tracking polls to look at, and one Th-F poll (Boston Globe). Here’s the numbers for all of them, with BG=Boston Globe, ARG=American Research Group, CNN=CNN/USA Today, and Zog=Zogby, in Kerry-Dean-Clark-Edwards-Lieberman order:
BG : 35-15-15-12-5 (+/- 5%)
ARG: 34-15-19-13-6 (+/- 4%)
CNN: 35-23-14-11-? (+/- 4%)
Zog: 31-22-14-8-7 (+/- 4.1%)
The big question here is, who has Dean’s support right, ARG and the Globe, or CNN/USA Today and Zogby? The gap between 15% and 22-23% is significant, both statistically and in the colloquial sense. Gallup’s doing CNN’s polling, and I’d hesitate to bet against Gallup and Zogby both. So I’d personally lay my money on Dean’s support holding up in the lower 20s. It could still be an interesting weekend; Kerry hasn’t won me a bottle of champagne yet.
ARG’s been doing its tracking poll in NH since December, but you’ve gotta wonder why they see a bunch of Clark support that nobody else does.
The other question is who’s right on Edwards’ support, Zogby or everyone else? I guess we’ll find out all the answers Tuesday night.
P.S. If you go to Zogby’s site, he’s saying a lot on the basis of polling changes that aren’t statistically significant. His three-day numbers have a 4.1% margin of error, and his one-day numbers that he talks about should have roughly a 7% margin of error. You look at the changes in his numbers, and you look at the margin of error, and you scratch your head.
Jonathan Chance said:
Wow. Can I get in on that action? I’ll mortgage the house.
There is no way that ANY president is a 500-1 favorite against a field of contenders 9 months from an election. Take his money. Then wait for Vegas to offer odds, which will likely be more like 2-1 in Bush’s favor, and place an offsetting bet. It’s called playing the middle. You’re guaranteed a profit.
[QUOTE=RTFirefly]
We’ve got three Th-F-Sa tracking polls to look at, and one F-Sa poll (Boston Globe). Here’s the numbers for all of them, with BG=Boston Globe, ARG=American Research Group, CNN=CNN/USA Today, and Zog=Zogby, in Kerry-Dean-Clark-Edwards-Lieberman order:
BG : 38-15-14-12-7 (+/- 5%)
ARG: 38-16-17-15-5 (+/- 4%)
CNN: 38-25-10-?-12 (+/- 4%)
Zog: 30-23-13-9-9 (+/- 4.1%)
Everybody but Zogby has Kerry’s support at 38%; Zogby has him at 30%. Once again, CNN and Zogby have Dean’s support up in the low to mid 20s, while the other two have him in the mid-teens. CNN has Edwards losing ground (although they don’t say how much; they don’t present the results in a table with their article, and they keep leaving stats out of their text), while everyone else has him gaining strength to varying degrees. CNN has Clark way down at 10%, ARG has him at 17%, and the other two are halfway between. Everyone has Lieberman picking up support, although the polls have him at anywhere from 5% to 12%.
It’s obvious that some polls are seeing a very different state of affairs than other polls. Do we have a statistical 3-way dead heat for second right now, or is Dean still way ahead of Clark and Edwards, and still with a chance to catch Kerry? There’s an enormous gap between Zogby’s 7-point Kerry lead, and the Globe’s 23-point Kerry lead.
On Wednesday morning, some pollsters are going to look like they knew things the other guys didn’t, and some pollsters are going to look absolutely, totally clueless. In two and a half days, we’ll know which was which.
I like Newsweek’s national poll. If the election were held today, Kerry would beat Bush, 49 to 46.
Yeah, but we don’t elect on the popular vote.
I’m betting (literally) that this sonuvabitch election will be close based on the electoral college just like the last one. Most of the red and blue states will stay the same and you’ll see BOTH candidates focusing on 3-6 states that will, in effect, decide the winner.
The latest Zogby poll has Kerry-Dean-Clark-Edwards at:
31-28-13-12
It seems like much of his support came from the Undecided category, which dropped ten percent; I have a feeling that headlines like “Kerry Lead Shrinks” and “Dean’s Numbers Climbing” might reinvigorate some former Dean voters.
We’ve got three F-Sa-Su tracking polls to look at, and one Sa-Su poll (Boston Globe). Here’s the numbers for all of them, with BG=Boston Globe, ARG=American Research Group, CNN=CNN/USA Today, and Zog=Zogby, in Kerry-Dean-Clark-Edwards-Lieberman order:
BG : 37-17-11-12-7 (+/- 5%)
ARG: 38-20-15-16-5 (+/- 4%)
CNN: 36-25-13-10-10 (+/- 4%)
Zog: 31-28-13-12-9 (+/- 4.1%)
I’m not sure these polls are all describing the same universe.
And Zogby *changed methodologies * THE DAY BEFORE THE ELECTION!
How egregiously unprofessional is that?
We’ve got only two Sa-Su-M tracking polls to look at, since CNN’s not put any numbers on their Web site, and one Su-M poll (Boston Globe). Here’s the numbers for all of them, with BG=Boston Globe, ARG=American Research Group, and Zog=Zogby, in Kerry-Dean-Clark-Edwards-Lieberman order:
BG : 37-20-8-12-7 (+/- 5%)
ARG: 35-25-13-15-6 (+/- 4%)
Zog: 37-24-9-12-9 (+/- 3.8%)
CNN just says that Kerry’s the frontrunner, and it’s a statistical dead heat for third among Edwards, Clark, and Lieberman.
Looks like all the polls were taken in the same universe this time. Besides the obvious Kerry-Dean stuff, everybody has Clark slipping (apparently below Edwards, but within the margin of error), Edwards stabilizing somewhere in the low to mid teens, and Lieberman’s mini-surge being more mini than surge.
Zogby has a lengthy comment about the changes in his numbers over the past few days, if you follow his link. He also sees one final shift in the momentum: from Kerry surging and Dean slipping after Iowa, to Dean stabilizing and regaining strength, to people abandoning Dean for Kerry again because they want a winner.
I’m kinda bummed that Zogby’s final poll has moved in line with everyone else’s. Obviously there’s no way to verify who really was in touch with the swings in voter sentiment in the days leading up to the primary. I was really hoping for a “this pollster knew what was going on, and that one was out in left field the whole time” moment, but we’re not going to get that. All of a sudden, they’re all more or less in agreement, so they’re going to all be right or wrong together. ARG has consistently shown Clark and Edwards doing a few points better than the other polls, and Zogby and CNN have shown Lieberman running a few points better than ARG and the Globe have. But that’s what we’re down to, in terms of pollsters potentially separating themselves from the pack.
NH primary voting ends at 8pm, according to CNN.
ARG polled SC, OK, and AZ over the weekend, if you’re interested. Overall, Kerry, Clark, and Edwards are bunched at the top, with Dean and Lieberman trailing. Edwards has a lead in SC, Clark in OK, and while the poll shows Kerry ahead of Clark by 3% in AZ, the margin of error is 4%. Kucinich and Sharpton are down in the 1% range, except in SC where Sharpton polls 15%.
Man, this is one funky primary season.
Kerry 39%, Dean 25%, Edwards 13%, Clark 12%, Lieberman 9%, Kucinich 2%.
And CNN’s projected Kerry as the winner.
With 64% reporting The Washington Post has it:
Sen. John F. Kerry 24,339 39%
Howard Dean 15,151 24%
Sen. John Edwards 7,896 13%
Gen. Wesley K. Clark 7,383 12%
Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman 5,844 9%
Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich 930 1%
The question really becomes now…
Can Edwards make enough headway in South Carolina to stay in contention?
Delaware is a non-binding primary coming up on Jan 31. Then we head for…
2/3 SC, MO, AZ, WA
That could finish it off if Kerry does well in all spots.
By the time most of the south comes into play (3/9) it could all be over except choosing the running mate.
I predict that Lieberman’s poor showing in New Hampshire leads to him dropping out. Kucinich and Sharpton are both in it for the long haul (especially with Sharpton polling at 15% in South Carolina).
I do, however, find it vastly amusing that GWB got 3 votes in NH and Hillary Clinton got 1!
The crash and burn of Dean shows how quickly the conventional wisdom of election prediction can change. Guessing the final outcome even now is still a crapshoot, although you’ve gotta give Kerry pretty good odds.
That said, here’s what I think will happen:
The entire field we have now will go to Super Tuesday. On that day, Edwards moves into second place behind Kerry. Dean may be close, or may stay in second. Clark gets hammered. Lieberman does about what he’s been doing so far.
After SD, Clark and Lieberman withdraw. Kerry, Edwards and Dean soldier on. Kerry’s weakness in the south, coupled with Edwards’ strength, leaves the two of them standing, but makes it clear to Kerry that he needs a VP like Edwards to do well in the south, and he has to do well in the south in the general election to win.
So, in the end Kerry maintains his lead. Edwards at some point throws his support to Kerry in a deal to be VP. Dean is finished. Dean will never be picked as a VP candidate - he’s a liability, not an asset.
But this is a guess with some pretty big error bars around it. The shortened primary season really makes this a crapshoot. The results of Super Tuesday could vitually lock up the nomination for Kerry, or it could throw the race wide open again. But my guess is that Edwards and Kerry will be the big winners on ST.
Well, so far, things are shaping up as I predicted. Dean’s not dead by a long shot… he actually still has more delegates than Kerry, at the moment. And the news reports I’m hearing give him a positive spin, in that a lot of people are being quoted as saying, “Well, we voted for Kerry, but we wanted to vote for Dean.”
But Kerry’s in the driver’s seat. Edwards is a strong third.
Clark is tied for third, after skipping Iowa, getting the midnight vote, and not having a single thing to dog him. He’s a dead man walking. If he’s not interested in the VP position, he’s effectively eliminated as a concern, except for any potential he has to drag someone else down thrashing as he goes.
Leiberman is in psychosis-mode. Nine percent to twelve percent is a three way tie. He’s not going to quit, either. He was VP last time, and he’s hardheaded enough to keep going. We’re good till Super Tuesday with him.
The last two are good for noise for a while, but they’re sideshow clowns.
On the OTHER hand, we’ve got a record turnout, beating 1992 by thousands. Which rocks. Especially during this cold snap. I think this is going to be the second most exciting election in decades.
2000 was the most exciting… but only on election night.
On election night in 2000, I told my wife I was staying up until it was decided. I eventually changed my mind. 
With 97% reporting, the NY Times says it went like this:
John Kerry 38.5% [82,594]
Howard Dean 26.3% [56,353]
Wesley Clark 12.4% [26,554]
John Edwards 12.1% [25,849]
Joe Lieberman 8.6% [18,392]
Dennis Kucinich 1.4% [3,015]
Al Sharpton .2% [342]
I’m amused that Kucinich got about 10 times as many votes as Sharpton. Get over yourself, Al. [Not all the polls give him 15% in S.C., by the way. I saw one that put him at about 4%.]
I agree with a lot of what I’m hearing. I don’t know what Clark is supposed to do, since his two big selling points are gone (being a veteran and not being Dean). Sounds like Dean stabilized a bit in the last few days, but he sure has fallen a long way. Kerry’s firmly in front, and it sounds like he’s leading in Missouri, which I think has the most votes next Tuesday. Edwards has admitted he HAS to win South Carolina. He’s the favorite since it’s his turf… I figure anything the other guys can do there is gravy. In particular, if Kerry comes in a close second, it might reduce the concerns he won’t play in the South. The others just need points anywhere they can score them.
With 97% of precincts reporting, here’s how it looks:
Kerry 82,594 39%
Dean 56,353 26%
Clark 26,554 12%
Edwards 25,849 12%
Lieberman 18,392 9%
Kucinich 3,015 1%
Other 1,589 1%
I’m curious as to how well Edwards will really do in South Carolina. From my experience in living there, there is an almost universal grudge factor against its more cosmopolitan and sophisticated neighbor to the north. When I was there, for example, the power-brokers in Columbia refused to allow the brand new Carolina Panthers to play temporarily in their beloved Williams Brice Stadium simply because they feared that the Panthers would identify themselves too much with Charlotte, and therefore with North Carolina. Edwards was born in South Carolina, but he moved to North Carolina. There has always been a bad taste about Hugh McColl for doing the same thing. McColl is the chairman of Bank of America, which used to be Nations Bank, and before that was North Carolina National Bank. Unless it has gotten over its parochialism in the past few years, I expect that right many South Carolinians might snub Edwards.