Two new national Polls - Race essentially tied

[CARLHAYDEN]

The only problem I can see at this point with the Harris (presumably) results (I could not get the link to show the internals) is that I doubt that there is only three per cent undecided.

I wonder if the phrasing of the question may have pushed respondents to select a candidate when they really hadn't made up their minds?

[CARLHAYDEN]

Vorlon,

I was unable to see the internals on the Time poll.


As I previously noted, it seems to me to be highly unlikely that only three per cent of the respondents are undecideds.

How was the preference question worded (do you know)?

[CARLHAYDEN]

I noticed you did not respond to my earlier point.

What, are you offended that I had something disparaging to say about a Gallup poll?

Gallup has made mistakes in the past (including when it was called the American Index of Public Opinion), and will undoubtedly make mistakes in the future.

When I see a nationwide poll with less than 800 respondents I immediately get suspicious, not only because of sample size, but because national polls with fewer than 800 respondents (in my experience) typically have other problems, which are not as often encountered in polls of a larger size.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Thanks for the reply.

It also seems to me that Kerry's style will not wear well with traditional Democrats.

His two modes appear to be the genuine one (rich liberal) who bores his audience to death (I know a major Democrat who stated that if Kerry gave a fireside chat, the fire would die), and a patheric attempt to talk like a 'regular guy' (remember his crude comment about Republicans beeing so dishonest).

Finally, I still say that Kerry has a real problem in that his long Senate record is ultraliberal, and his recent policy statements do not mesh well with his record.  That is to say, which Kerry would you get if you elected him?