Monday, November 01, 2004

The Last Word From Zogby

Zogby has Bush up 48-47 including leaners, and tied with Kerry at 46 without leaners. Both are within the margin of error.

But here's something interesting:

Pollster John Zogby: "Razor thin margin here, if there is one at all. The President still does not get above 48%. The real news here is that 18-29 year olds favor Kerry 64% to 35%, with 1% for Nader—and 0% undecided. When I see a low undecided number it means that group is going to vote. I am factoring this group to be 12% of the total vote -- but it could be higher. Each point it goes higher translates into two-thirds of a percent for Kerry -- if these numbers hold up."


That follows similar news yesterday, also from Zogby:

Polling firm Zogby International and partner Rock the Vote found Massachusetts Senator John Kerry leading President Bush 55% to 40% among 18-29 year-old likely voters in their first joint Rock the Vote Mobile political poll, conducted exclusively on mobile phones October 27 through 30, 2004. Independent Ralph Nader received 1.6%, while 4% remain undecided in the survey of 6,039 likely voters. The poll is centered on subscribers to the Rock the Vote Mobile (RTVMO) platform, a joint initiative of Rock the Vote and Motorola Inc. (for more information: The poll has margin of error of +/-1.2 percentage points.

The Rock the Vote Mobile political poll was conducted using a sample group from Rock the Vote Mobile’s 120,000-subscriber base. Participants in the Rock the Vote Mobile (RTVMO) platform, a civic engagement initiative launched last March by Rock the Vote and Motorola, Inc. (NYSE: MOT), responded to this poll between October 27 and October 30.

“The results of this text-message poll mirror what we’re seeing in our more conventional polls,” said John Zogby, CEO and president of Utica, N.Y.-based Zogby International. “Among 18-29 year-olds, Kerry leads the President by 14 points — 55% to 41% in our current daily tracking poll—virtually identical to these results. Our text-message poll seems to have been validated by this experiment. All in all, I think we’ve broken some new ground in polling.”


Anonymous Anonymous said...

there are very very few true undecideds and it has been that way for some time. I am curious after the election, if they did a poll to see how many people actually shifted from one candidate to another....basically whether all the ads, attacks, stump speeches etc. actually makes a difference.

as far as the race, this is basically not callable by polls. we must wait and see and pray that this is decided by people and not courts. If it ends up in court, it is a terrible result for america, both internally and also how we are viewed internationally.

should be interesting...

11:20 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Blame the Republicans should the election slide in a litigation black hole.
They are the ones employing the overwhelming majority of the reported slimy tactics to steal votes, (as David factually pointed out in a recent blog statement).
The Republicans involved in these tactics don't seem to care about American truth and justice, and whether our democracy could be judged negatively abroad, just as long as their dubious candidate wins.

11:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i assume the republicans wil be totally at fault if either candidate wins. If BUsh wins, they lied to get him there (again), right and therefore litigation ensues. And if Kerry wins, litigation ensues because the republicans will argue some point about the voting. Blind leading the blind here. Let's hope it is not as close as it appears so the evil republicans and the angelic democrats dont have to do battle.

For a more interesting and intelligent perspective, this link shows just how both sides have been despicable during the campaign.

12:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No one is saying that all Republicans are evil or all Democrats are angelic. David said in his post yesterday that when he asks conservatives to back up the claim that Democrats are also committing fraudulent acts regarding voter suppression or registrations, etc., conservatives blindly reply that "everyone does it."

It's a pretty clear statement. If conservatives know of specific fraud committed by Democrats, then why haven't they said so?

The worst I've seen is complaints that a very high percentage of people are voted in a given county or precinct. Sadly, conservatives are the only ones complaining, even though voter registration (or turnout) isn't necessarily a Democratic Party action.

1:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

1:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wait, are you telling me that someone, a conservative group or something, has leveled a complaint that turnout is too large? You are kidding right? I believe I can be sure of myself when i say that is total and absolute spin. There has to be more to that claim, like people are voting twice, people from france are voting, people age five are voting or something. But if you expect any rational human being to believe that the complaint is simply that too many eligible voters are voting.....well, you made me laugh.

1:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bush wins popular vote
Kerry wins election by one state

reverse of 2000.

1:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Today's NY Times quotes the Florida Republican party person as saying that voter registration levels are close to the total number of eligible voters in some districts. And they reference Ed Gillespie, who they say has claimed that in some districts, there are more voter registrations than eligible voters.

NY Times says that Gillespie isn't taking into account people who have moved. But the bigger question is: why would Gillespie or the Florida Republican person assume that the Democrats are behind what they are alleging? Or is that just their spin?

3:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Voter fraud charges fly, but NYT reporters failed to verify
An article in the November 1 edition of The New York Times passed along Republican accusations of voter fraud without making any apparent effort to verify them, even though journalists at other newspapers have raised serious doubts about the accusations.

In the article, titled "Complaints: Charges of Fraud and Voter Suppression," reporters Kate Zernike and William Yardley stated:

Florida Republicans on Thursday said they had determined that at least 925 felons had either already voted illegally in early voting or had requested absentee ballots. And Ms. [Mindy Tucker] Fletcher [adviser to the Florida Republican Party] left open the possibility that the party intended to challenge ineligible voters at the polls on Election Day.

However, as an article in the October 29 edition of the St. Petersburg Times reported, the Florida Republican Party based this conclusion on "two controversial and flawed state databases" which had been rejected by the state's Republican secretary of state, Glenda Hood. In addition, the St. Petersburg Times noted that its reporters "quickly found" two people on the list who were, in fact, eligible to vote:

Records show Neal D. Bolinger, 57, of St. Petersburg had his rights restored in 1974, two years after his conviction for grand larceny, and has been voting ever since.

He used an absentee ballot last week to vote straight Republican.

It's the second time in four years his name has been flagged. He had to convince Pinellas County election officials in 2000 that he was qualified.

"If every four years I come up on the list and have to have myself reinstated, that will become a problem, and I'll have to start shaking some trees," he said.

Tampa resident Jeffrey Arnold, 44, said he received his clemency more than a dozen years ago and has been voting ever since. The exact status of Arnold and others could not be confirmed Thursday by the Times.

The New York Times' Zernike and Yardley also uncritically passed along claims by an unnamed "official of the state Republican party" in Pennsylvania that 10,000 of 130,000 letters sent "congratulating newly registered voters" were returned. No proof was offered that 10,000 letters were actually returned; in fact, when reporters for the Philadelphia Inquirer asked for a list, Republicans provided only six names, as an October 31 article noted.

In addition, the New York Times article stated that the returned letters, assuming they exist, indicate "that the people had died or that the address was nonexistent." The article failed to note that the letters could have been returned for several other reasons, especially if, as Republican parties in other states such as Ohio have done, they were sent as registered mail; voters may not have been home when the letter was delivered, or they may have refused to receive a mailing from Republicans.

4:40 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Listed on BlogShares