Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll: 42-42

[CARLHAYDEN]

Not to "rag" on Fox, since I'm independent and try to play nice and non-partisan on this board, but they are generally thought to have a conservative leaning.  And I have noted in the past three years that they USUALLY (not always, but usually) show Bush with a better approval rating than most other polls.  So, I not only wonder about their methodologies, but I wonder if they also threw Bush-leaner states into the "Battleground", like Arizona, Nevada, Arkansas, Missouri, Colorado, Louisiana, etc... some of which (like LA and MO) are more than just slight leans.  Those are states Kerry COULD pick off, but if he does, the race has probably been long since over, since it means he'd have probably already wrapped up FL, PA, and OH.

I'm not saying the poll is certainly wrong.  I'm just always skeptical of the Fox/OD polls.  They have notoriously leaned, oddly, the same direction many accuse their broadcasts of leaning.

In case you think I've hit my head...

Fox/OD Bush approval 5/19 = 48%
Newsweek 5/14 = 42%
Time/CNN 5/13 = 46%
Zogby 5/13 = 42%
CBS 5/11 = 44%
CNN/USA Today/Gallup 5/9 = 46%
Pew 5/9 = 44%

7 polls in the last 10 days.  Fox/OD shows the highest approval rating.  Their early April poll was similar, though Newsweek was even and Gallup actually higher.  Early February (not as many March polls to compare)?  Time/CNN was the only one higher, and barely.  Fox/OD always leans pro-Republican... whether intentional or not, I won't debate that... but the fact is, they do.

First, Zogby has a real problem with accuracy.  Of the major polls in 2002, he had far and away the highest margin of error and far and away the highest wrong prediction.

Second, Newsweek has been a bad joke for years.  It consistently slants its polls to the lefft both by sample and other means.

Third, the other results are all within margin of error.

Fourth, Bush took a real barrage of hits from the liberal media which would have you believe that the only news was the Iraqi prisoners weren't treated well and that Bush was somehow responsible for that ill treatment.  The people who understandably were upset with what happened in the prison have since come to realize that the media is overplaying its hand and appreciates that Bush has not been panicked by the media attacks.

[CARLHAYDEN]

First, Zogby has a real problem with accuracy.  Of the major polls in 2002, he had far and away the highest margin of error and far and away the highest wrong prediction.

Not sure if you meant 2002 (Congressionals) or 2000.  I'll presume you meant 2000.  His final poll in 2000 was 48% Gore, 46% Bush.  While imperfect, this (Zogby) was one of the BEST polls!!!

TIPP was 48-46 in favor of Bush.  Hotline was 45-42 Bush.  ABC was 48-45 Bush.  Gallup was 48-46 Bush.  Marist was 49-44 Bush.  NBC/WSJ was 47-44 Bush.  Newsweek, the supposedly Democratic bastion, was 45-43 Bush.  Pew was 49-47 Bush.  CBS News was 45-44 Gore.  CBS/NYT was 47-42 Bush.  Fox/OD was 43-43 tie.  Harris was 47-47 tie.  ICR was 46-44 Bush.  Tarrance/Lake was 50-45 Bush.  (These are all the final polls by these groups... taken in early November.)

This is quite obvious... Zogby was one of only four polls showing a tie or a narrow Gore win.  That's out of 15 polls!!!  And of the four that did well, one of which, admittedly, was Fox/OD (the ones I'm harping on), Zogby was probably not the worst.  Fox/OD was, due to its high undecided.  Harris was the best (lowest undecided, with a 47-47 tie)... followed by CBS News, then Zogby, then Fox/OD.  The other 11(!!) may have still caught the MOE to avoid being "wrong" statistically... but they weren't good... and that includes some pretty big names, like Gallup, TIPP, and Tarrance/Lake.

State by state, if I recall, Zogby was also good (though he did mess up the ever-critical Florida).  But clearly, overall, he was one of the best.  Also, check out the comparisons to other polling companies that Survey USA has conducted.  They do reasonably well, and...  One of the pollsters they have trouble beating?  Zogby.

First, I meant EXACTLY what I said.  

Second, read the review from the National Council on Public Polls for the 2002 elections.

Third, Zogby is a highly partisan Democrat who had a brother working in the Clinton administration.  He had inside information that the Democrats were running a very effective drive in 2000 to get their cattle to the polls.  If that cattle drive had not been so effective Bush would have won by a couple of points in the popular vote.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Good work, SpinPolice.

Two points which most polls fail to report is the 'hardness' of the support for the candidate, and the turnout prediction.

Both of these factors are interrelated.

People are reluctant to say "undecided" when they in fact are undecided as they believe that this would be interpreted as meaning they aren't following the campaign (which many of them are not) so they just say "yes" to one of the names offered.  Not wishing to totally lie, if asked, they admit that they are "leaning" to whatever candidate.

In addition, a much higher percentage of respondents say they will be voting in the upcoming election than will actually be the case.   Interesingly enough, far more respondents in post election polls say they voted in the election than actually did.  Again they don't want to admit they didn't do what they have been told is their 'civic duty.'

Every poll I have seen over the past couple of months has indicated that the 'hard' Bush support is greater than the 'hard' Kerry support, and that most of the hard 'Kerry' support is in fact merely anti-Bush support (anybody but bush).

Also, Kerry's seeming ambivlance on the issues is in part based on the fact that the non-bush vote (i.e. not 'hard' for bush) is almost evenly split between hard lefties and moderates who agree more with Bush on the issues than they do with Kerry's pre-2004 stance on the issues.  

Kerry cann't afford to enrage the moderates but cann't really bring himself to renounce his real (long term) policy preferences, hence the stupid sounding double-talk.