Bush takes back the lead in New Hampshire

[Inmate Trump]

In the new American Research Group Poll, conducted in New Hampshire, Bush leads Kerry 45% to 39%, while Nader gets 8%.  Without Nader in the race, Bush still leads 47% to Kerry's 45%.

[ElCidGOP]

Its funny how the polls in favor of GWB get no play in the everyday media.  The recent CBS/New York Crimes polls was on page A18 in the paper and NEVER even mentioned on CBS news at all!  If the poll had shown JFKerry in front, it would have been front page news.  The only people this hurts are the Dems, it distorts the TRUE political picture.

[ShapeShifter]

Nader won 3.9 percent of the vote in 2000.
Nation wide he got something like 2.7 percent.
So any poll that gives Nader 8 percent in NH, I would take with a grain of salt.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I doubt anyone took Kerry's 15 point "lead" in NH seriously.  Bush's votes in NH will be within 5 points of his national average.

[M]

Guys, it's March. Chill. These are the most worthless polls I've ever seen. One week Kery leads Bush by 20%, the next Nader is getting a third of the vote, and the next Lyndion Larouche and  Kermit the Frog are tied at first. Really, this stuff won't matter until at least July.

[ShapeShifter]

Okay, I will chill. You are right. It is rather far from the election. If anything this poll shows a close competitive race in NH.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Nader won 3.9 percent of the vote in 2000.
Nation wide he got something like 2.7 percent.
So any poll that gives Nader 8 percent in NH, I would take with a grain of salt.

A lot of nationwide and swing state polls, are showing Nader at 6-7%, so 8% in NH doesn't seem inconsistent.  I really have no idea who these Nader supporter are, so it's too soon to tell whether this is a real phenomenon.

[The Vorlon]

Nader won 3.9 percent of the vote in 2000.
Nation wide he got something like 2.7 percent.
So any poll that gives Nader 8 percent in NH, I would take with a grain of salt.

A lot of nationwide and swing state polls, are showing Nader at 6-7%, so 8% in NH doesn't seem inconsistent.  I really have no idea who these Nader supporter are, so it's too soon to tell whether this is a real phenomenon.

Any Presidential election with an incumbant president is first and formost and referendum on the Incumbant.

Bush vs Bush is essentially a draw.

Many polls are showing essential the same thing, in many national and State polls, specifically...

With Nader on the "test" ballot Bush wins by mid single digits, with Nader off the ballot it is close - Bush's support hardly varries at all dependinging on if Nader is in or out...

Bush has a base vote of 46ish percent who have voted "yes" in the Bush "Referendum"

Kerry has a base support of about 41ish % who have voted "No" in the Bush Referendum

Nader likely has a "real" support base of maybe a % or two, and 5 or so percent are "parking" their vote with Nader till they decide whom between Bush and Kerry is the lesser of two evils...

Bush won New Hampshire in 2000 by, I believe, about 1.5 points.. so this poll is yet one more data point that suggest 2004 versus 2000 is deja vue all over again...

[elcorazon]

Its funny how the polls in favor of GWB get no play in the everyday media.  The recent CBS/New York Crimes polls was on page A18 in the paper and NEVER even mentioned on CBS news at all!  If the poll had shown JFKerry in front, it would have been front page news.  The only people this hurts are the Dems, it distorts the TRUE political picture.

I believe that during the primaries before Kerry was assured of the nomination, the polls were deemed more newsworthy (and in fact helped guarantee Kerry would get the nomination).  Polls at this time are so early, they are not worthy of front page status.  I don't think the other ones were either myself, but interest in the horse race was such that the media felt that the polls deserved that type of status.

Not everything is a liberal conspiracy.

[muon2]

I agree with the key points Vorlon makes about incumbency and the Nader factor. Elections are always about the incumbent administration, and only the most unusual external events can affect that. Pollsters who get someone to say Nader at this stage are getting someone using name recognition to avoid yet making a selection between Bush and Kerry. A real third party movement late in the campaign usually bodes ill for the incumbent.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Guys, it's March. Chill. These are the most worthless polls I've ever seen. One week Kery leads Bush by 20%, the next Nader is getting a third of the vote, and the next Lyndion Larouche and  Kermit the Frog are tied at first. Really, this stuff won't matter until at least July.

Yeah, but we need something to talk about until then .  Without these polls, we're just blindly guessing - at least now we have something to go on.  It also helps us see trends emerging.

At this point in the game, however, nationwide polls are probably a lot more useful than state-by-state numbers.  The best predictor of Bush's or Kerry's chances come not from Ohio or Pennsylvania, or Florida numbers, but nationwide numbers.  If either has a nationwide lead outside the MoE, they are in the lead.  If either Bush or Kerry has a 3 percentage point lead in the popular tally, he WILL win the EV, regardless.  It's only when they are in a national dead-heat that you need to start looking at states.

So, does anyone have some good national numbers?

[The Vorlon]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Depends on your definition of "good"...

These are all under a week old...

3 polls showing (collectively)  a  Bush lead...

Investors Business Daily - Bush +5
http://www.investors.com/editorial/general.asp?v=3/13

CBS News/NYTimes - Bush +8
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/15/opinion/polls/main606465.shtml

Rassmussen Research - Bush +4
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Presidential_Tracking_Poll.htm

One poll showing a big kerry lead....

ARG - Kerry +6
http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/presballot/


No person's liberty is safe while Congress is in session - Thomas Jefferson

[Filuwaúrdjan]

One of the problems I have with people saying: "X has a 5 point lead in X" is that it never tells the whole story.
What % did a third party/independent candidate get in the poll?
What was the % undecided?
What was the margin or error?
Etc.

[CTguy]

It's funny how on FoxNews, Kerry was never leading in the polls even though at one point he was up by about 10 points in almost every single national poll done by credible sources.  

Bias works both ways.

[zachman]

Nader is an option in these polls that means either Undecided or N.O.T.C.

As for the poll, both polls were small and therefore widely inaccurate.  I'm speculating that Kerry will be within 5% of his national average, finishing just above 50%.  Bush will slip to about 42%, and third parties will earn 4% here.

[Inmate Trump]

Nader is an option in these polls that means either Undecided or N.O.T.C.

As for the poll, both polls were small and therefore widely inaccurate.  I'm speculating that Kerry will be within 5% of his national average, finishing just above 50%.  Bush will slip to about 42%, and third parties will earn 4% here.

Take notice, all Republicans:  Every poll that has Bush leading, either nationally or statewide, the Dems call inaccurate.  Any poll that shows Kerry leading is dead-on right.

[zachman]

I'm from NH, I know NH, in NH Bush will not beat John Kerry.

[angus]

We notice.  ElCidGOP brought this issue up in his post mentioning various news' sources spins.  For you, the reader, it's a choice.  I read both the NYT and the WSJ.  You can bet your bottom dollar both the Bush campaign and the Kerry Campaign do too!

[TheOldLine]

Its important to remember that while elections are primarily a referendum on the incumbent, that is only presuming that the opponent has passed some minimum bars on national security, the economy, and leadership.

Read here for more:

 http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/TheNote/TheNote_Mar804.html

Quote:

Despite what you'll hear in some quarters, the prospects for the President's re-election are NOT just about the incumbent.

America's judgment on the job Mr. Bush has done is key, but John Kerry has to clear a series of bars on national security credibility; likeability; character; and being a potential good steward of a good economy if he is going to have a chance to win -- no matter what kind of campaign BC04 runs or what people think of the President.

So -- as we have written before -- the talking points, the surrogates, the Web sites, the research and (soon) the campaign ads from the GOP side are largely geared toward making sure that Kerry gets nowhere near those bars in the eyes of the American people.

Late winter and early spring, in other words, are the times to strangle the baby in the crib. (How's that for a Monday metaphor to get your attention?)

The Old Line

[Gustaf]

Its important to remember that while elections are primarily a referendum on the incumbent, that is only presuming that the opponent has passed some minimum bars on national security, the economy, and leadership.

Read here for more:

 http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/TheNote/TheNote_Mar804.html

Quote:

Despite what you'll hear in some quarters, the prospects for the President's re-election are NOT just about the incumbent.

America's judgment on the job Mr. Bush has done is key, but John Kerry has to clear a series of bars on national security credibility; likeability; character; and being a potential good steward of a good economy if he is going to have a chance to win -- no matter what kind of campaign BC04 runs or what people think of the President.

So -- as we have written before -- the talking points, the surrogates, the Web sites, the research and (soon) the campaign ads from the GOP side are largely geared toward making sure that Kerry gets nowhere near those bars in the eyes of the American people.

Late winter and early spring, in other words, are the times to strangle the baby in the crib. (How's that for a Monday metaphor to get your attention?)

The Old Line

Good points. But I think Kerry would ahve to screw up pretty bad to not clear those bars. On the other hand, judging from the last days he seem very able to do just that.

[agcatter]

In light of earlier national polls. the Kerry 15 point lead in NH seemed fantasy to me.  It is a state that has a Republican governor, two Republican Senators, and two of two Republican House members as well as being a state carried (although narrowly) by Bush in 2000.  The Kerry blowout shown by the earlier poll just didn't pass the reality test.  The state is, and always has been, extremely competetive.  It will swing one way or another by just a few points.

[zachman]

You are probably right, agcat, whether I like it or not. Look at the county data from 2000 and see how little variation there is throughout the state. 5 of the 10 counties were won with less than 50%. We will vote for Kerry, although I do realize there are so many loyal Republicans here that will vote for Bush, enough to gurantee him 40%.

[The Vorlon]

In light of earlier national polls. the Kerry 15 point lead in NH seemed fantasy to me.  It is a state that has a Republican governor, two Republican Senators, and two of two Republican House members as well as being a state carried (although narrowly) by Bush in 2000.  The Kerry blowout shown by the earlier poll just didn't pass the reality test.  The state is, and always has been, extremely competetive.  It will swing one way or another by just a few points.

The GOP holds a 36% to 27% (a 1.33 to 1 ratio) voter registration advantage in New Hampshire - That Kerry +15 poll actuallly had a sample where Democrats outnumbered Republicans by 17%..

It was, as I have previously posted, methodological bird droppings... My Cat could do a better poll..

The new ARG Poll (ARG is a marginal polling firm BTW - not god awful but not great) had a 157 to 130 ratio of Republicans to Democrats (1.21 to 1 ratio) so they are at least roughly in the game....but still quite a bit out..

A sample size of 463...? (+/- 4.6%) - For $%%$@#! sake put a crowbar in your wallet and do these thing right people!! -

....and while your at it, maybe do more than 1 call back if you get no answer... &*&^&%^%!!@@$%#!

Doesn't anybody know how to do a poll anymore...? (he says muttering under his breath)

[angus]

The new ARG Poll (ARG is a marginal polling firm BTW - not god awful but not great) had a 157 to 130 ratio of Republicans to Democrats (1.21 to 1 ratio) so they are at least roughly in the game....but still quite a bit out..

A sample size of 463...? (+/- 4.6%) - For $%%$@#! sake put a crowbar in your wallet and do these thing right people!!

Thanks.  That's what I thought, but I'm no expert.  It was a serious question.

[Gustaf]

In light of earlier national polls. the Kerry 15 point lead in NH seemed fantasy to me.  It is a state that has a Republican governor, two Republican Senators, and two of two Republican House members as well as being a state carried (although narrowly) by Bush in 2000.  The Kerry blowout shown by the earlier poll just didn't pass the reality test.  The state is, and always has been, extremely competetive.  It will swing one way or another by just a few points.

The GOP holds a 36% to 27% (a 1.33 to 1 ratio) voter registration advantage in New Hampshire - That Kerry +15 poll actuallly had a sample where Democrats outnumbered Republicans by 17%..

It was, as I have previously posted, methodological bird droppings... My Cat could do a better poll..

The new ARG Poll (ARG is a marginal polling firm BTW - not god awful but not great) had a 157 to 130 ratio of Republicans to Democrats (1.21 to 1 ratio) so they are at least roughly in the game....but still quite a bit out..

A sample size of 463...? (+/- 4.6%) - For $%%$@#! sake put a crowbar in your wallet and do these thing right people!! -

....and while your at it, maybe do more than 1 call back if you get no answer... &*&^&%^%!!@@$%#!

Doesn't anybody know how to do a poll anymore...? (he says muttering under his breath)

It's funny how incompetent pollsters often are...good we have Vorlon to dig up all this stuff...I've seen a wrose poll in Sweden though, it had a sample of 250 and a MoE of 6% a side...

The scary thing is that there are so few competent polling firms...