Tralls

I feel like these official polls showing a close race are naturally more skewed to be answered by older, more Republican individuals. Minorities are not properly accounted for nor are younger individuals, all which would skew more Democratic. Not many young and poor have house phones, i.e. either cell phones or nothing, and these people will most likely not vote for Bush. Normally they would probably not vote at all but I feel this time around will be different. Heck, I voted for Bush and am switching to Kerry this time, no poll has accounted for my vote!

Ustwo

I do, vote fraud can't be counted in polls. I've lived in Chicago, I know of what I speak.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

daswig

Actually, I think it's the other way around. I think the Republicans are going to win by a far larger majority than people think is possible.

Soccer moms have become Security moms. And no matter how hard Kerry tries to paint himself as a hawk on the War on terrorism, people ain't buying it. "I am the anti-war candidate"--John "appeasement" Kerry"

Tralls

You see the articles already coming out of FLA regarding voter problems with the absentee and early voting ballots. I definitely believe voter fraud is a real problem and think it helped put the wrong man in charge 4 years ago, even though I did vote for him...I wont ever let myself forget that mistake!

Elaborate on what you know...always interested.

Tralls

Daswig, but soccer moms are reflected in the polls...provide some evidence as to why you think they may be underestimated as skewing Right compared to thier representation in the polls taking place.

daswig

tralls, just call it a gut feeling, coupled with the DNC's head begging people to "vote early and often" in the media polls after the debates. It looks like there's a coordinated effort to skew polls in Kerry's favor underway, and I don't think the support is actually there. BTW, you did notice that it was DEMOCRATS engaging in voter fraud in Florida already, didn't you?

daswig

tralls, which side is the master of voting fraud? One word for ya: "Daley".

trickyy

i heard that cell phone users will vote in a similar proportion to the rest of the country. this does not account for people without a phone, though.

one thing that i find interesting is that many polls on tv are just simply bush vs. kerry. while it may be a good measure of the overall desire of the country, the popular vote doesn't matter in the election. in fact, kerry has such a substantial lead in places like california and new york, these polls could make the race appear closer than it actually is.

but when you get down to each state, the electoral race is actually very close as well. here is a link to the best election gauge that i've found. you may need to sign up for the free la times subscription if the link doesn't show up.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics...,1851284.flash

(if that doesn't work, go here and click on the map graphic:
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics...5465.htmlstory )

the interactive map allows you to update swing states (and any others) as you see fit to predict the outcome of the election. updated polling data is included for each state. the last few times i filled this out (assuming battleground state polling to be 100% accurate) the election was decided single state.

Superbelt

Actually the dems are being purposefully underrepresented in polls this year.

Gallup polling, which does polling for Time, USA Today and CNN, is oversampling Republicans to a disgusting degree. They are estimating that about 12% more republicans than Democrats are going to vote. This, despite the widespread dislike of Bush among Democrats and the fact that Democrats in the past few election cycles have been voting at a higher rate than Republicans.

That's why the recent poll by Gallup, as reported by CNN shows Bush winning 52 to 46. Completely flying in the face of virtually every other poll out there showing Kerry leading.

Seandq

I also feel Dems are being underestimated. It's being shown too, with polls such as the Gallup's market share having a higher Republican number polled than Democratic.

Seandq

Wow, I just posted what you just said..at the exact same time. Heh.

hannukah harry

when i was reading about the various "real" (ie. phone polls by legitamite pollsters, not online) polls, most of them were showing bush and kerry neck and neck but with saying that more registered repubs were called them dems. so maybe it's not as close as we actually think...

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

Tralls

damn stoner liberals! Oh wait, that's me!

ARTelevision

Not really. What I do think is that polls as they are conceived of and executed today are really very poor ways of tracking the "pulse of the nation."

There has got to be a better way of figuring out what folks are thinking at any one time in our society. Wouldn't you agree?

__________________
create evolution

Ustwo

Not really. I think the only problem with the polls is sample size and distribution. Several 'major' polls this year have turned out to have sampled a disproportionate number of republicans or democrats. Most polls take 1000 people which would be good except that the manner in which they are conducted may well lead to biases.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

ARTelevision

I suppose I'm looking for some technical breakthrough that will really obsolete the current sampling method used. I can conceive of many ways to take the nation's pulse that would be better than these tiny selectively biased samples turn out to be. Can't you?

__________________
create evolution

theusername

I for one don't. For all those motivated "Bush haters" there's just as many Dems who dont hate bush, (dont like him either), but aren't enthusiastic about Kerry and just may not show up at the polls.

__________________
?

Ustwo

No, not really. Perhaps my brain is dead from it being a monday.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Beatlefan58

At this point, the nationwide polls are nothing more than window dressing. Bush doesn't care if he loses California by 2 or 22 points, and Kerry couldn't care less if Texas goes to Bush by 5 or 25 points; therefore, the action is concentrated in a handful of states. I've been watching the state-by-state polling on Rasmussen and RealClearPolitics. Reapportionment actually favors Bush; if all the states voted as they did in 2000, Kerry would get 5 (I think that's right) fewer electoral votes. Thus, he has to hold all those states, and pick up one with 6 or more electoral votes. Conversely, Bush has to hold all his from last time, and virtually any state switching to Kerry causes Bush to lose.

There's been a lot (and will be, I'm sure) said about the usefulness of the electoral college, but I can tell you one big benefit. I'm in Arkansas, where Kerry pulled out his staff and money about 2 weeks ago. There aren't any presidental ads running here for either candidate unless it's on the national broadcasts. It's so nice!

Ustwo

I'm in Illinois and not being in a swing state is a wonderful thing. No adds and very few signs. Some dipshit decided to deface a bunch of the Bush ones that I did see on my way to work, but who cares, at best it will be close for Kerry here. The Illinois republican party must either be run by Democrats or idiots (KEYS?!?!) and there is little doubt the state will go to Kerry.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

MSD

Some of us just gave up on the Democratic Party and registered as Libertarians.

pan6467

I think polls are used for 2 reasons presently or rather to cause 2 effects. And I think they are very effective in their purposes.

1) To make skew polls in a certain way so that the bias majority will have the general populace questioning why they disagree with the majority and to ease some follower types into wanting to be part of the majority (hence the skewed bias to make the poll and the winner look attractive). Noone likes to feel they are stupid or that they are different and the way polls are they prey on the weak to change their opinions. (This is the whole purpose of polls anyway). Very apparent by the way theymake sure third parties are always polled very very weak and under the +/-.

2) There is also my belief that if the first doesn't affect as many as they hope, that by showing polls that show the candidate or issue a decisive winner that this phase will finish off the opposition. What this phase does is says this, "the majority already feel this way, so your voice and vote won't matter." This is effective by keeping those who may be not so passionate, sick, or fair weather (has to be decent weather to vote) voters away from the polling booths.

I think polls are used to drive the economy to some degree. If people see polls saying people are holding money more closely and plan to buy less, the people get worried and buy less. If polls show the economy to be good, people spend more. This was very effective during Clinton, Reagan and Carter (to some degree). Polls may take the pulse of the populace but they use the pulse to show and hopefully produce the results that the person funding the polls wishes to get.

Anyone on here can run a poll and get the desired effect they want then I suspect get enough people to believe that poll truly is representative of how a majority on here feels. Whether it is truly how they feel or not. This is nothing new, polls and control tricks to get the majority to agree like this are as old as history itself. They don't always work, but they are always effective. Hence, advertising gimmicks, such as 4 out of 5 dentists that chew gum....

I think unless something major happens this election is very much a toss up, I also have a feeling states Bush had planned on winning he'll lose (or at the very least be far closer than expected) and I think Kerry will have the same surprises.

At one time I thought the polls were skewed to make the election look closer than it truly was to keep interest in the election and to keep it from being over in July. However, the past few months things have turned around and the debates and the fact Bush seems to have lost his momentum makes it closer than it was again polls worked to keep the interest going). However those now that worked to keep the interest there now have to get the polls and majority back into Bush's corner (hence the large leads Bush is being seen with).

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"