Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Battleground States Poll: (Kerry is ahead in 12/16 Zogby sauced battleground state polls)
wsj.com ^ | 05/24/04 | wsj

Posted on 05/24/2004 5:34:37 PM PDT by KQQL

Zogby 16 state polls

May 18-23

Bush and Kerry may be speaking to all of America, but their campaign advisers are focusing on a narrower slice of the population and targeting the candidates' messages to voters in particularly contentious states. Zogby Interactive is conducting polls in 16 of those states chosen by WSJ.com. See the latest results.

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Arkansas; US: Florida; US: Michigan; US: Minnesota; US: Missouri; US: Nevada; US: New Mexico; US: Ohio; US: Oregon; US: Pennsylvania; US: Tennessee; US: West Virginia
KEYWORDS: 2004; battleground; polls; zogby
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-94 next last

1 posted on 05/24/2004 5:34:38 PM PDT by KQQL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Dales; Torie; ambrose; NYRepublican; AntiGuv; Kuksool; JohnnyZ

@


2 posted on 05/24/2004 5:36:16 PM PDT by KQQL (@)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DrDeb

@


3 posted on 05/24/2004 5:36:28 PM PDT by KQQL (@)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: KQQL

Sorry, but I have come to believe that Zogby is not nearly so objective, or principled as he would have us political freaks believe.

Zogby is a shrewd political activist with a lot of patience. He is becoming exposed as the stakes have become very high.


4 posted on 05/24/2004 5:39:06 PM PDT by Radix (Vote for the Democrat and you will get Cash and Kerry!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KQQL
Online polls?

Is this a joke?

5 posted on 05/24/2004 5:40:24 PM PDT by Texas_Dawg (2004 Doom World Tour.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KQQL; Torie; Dales

These are e-mail polls, not scientific telephone polls.

The Southern poll results contradict Zogby's own telephone poll of the South which was published last week in the Atlanta Journal Constitution.


6 posted on 05/24/2004 5:41:08 PM PDT by ambrose (AP Headline: "Kerry Says His 'Family' Owns SUV, Not He")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KQQL
Poll not of American adults, registered voters, or likely voters, but rather a poll of likely voters who signed up with Zogby Interactive at some point over the last few years (with a small subset telephoned to verify they were who they said they were).

Interesting, but not to be taken too seriously, unless someone takes on faith that those who visit Zogby's site are representative in attitude of the public in general (a dubious proposition). Even with scaling to representative demographics, it still is unlikely to be truly representative-- as the results which are wildly different than other polls suggests.

7 posted on 05/24/2004 5:41:33 PM PDT by Dales
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dales

lol


8 posted on 05/24/2004 5:42:17 PM PDT by KQQL (@)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ambrose

It will be interesting to see the trends in his interactive polls in the future, though. I won't use them to help determine where any state stands, but they should have some sort of use for movement.


9 posted on 05/24/2004 5:43:27 PM PDT by Dales
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

I don't trust zogby polls, they were way off in 2002.


10 posted on 05/24/2004 5:44:19 PM PDT by TheModerateMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Dales

I take it you're not going to rely on them in your regular updates...


11 posted on 05/24/2004 5:44:20 PM PDT by ambrose (AP Headline: "Kerry Says His 'Family' Owns SUV, Not He")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ambrose

I think that is a safe assumption. :-) I'll note them in my blog though.


12 posted on 05/24/2004 5:44:59 PM PDT by Dales
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Dales

Zogby's numbers are contradictory... but that doesn't seem to keep him for getting more work. One day he publishes a national poll - with its internals showing Bush ahead in the South by only 5 points. A few days later he publishes another poll of just the South alone, and it has Bush up by 17 points. No one asks Zogby how he can come up with such wildly contradictory numbers.


13 posted on 05/24/2004 5:46:29 PM PDT by ambrose (AP Headline: "Kerry Says His 'Family' Owns SUV, Not He")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: KQQL
I like this. Scroll down until you see this:
If anybody wants to help out the marijuana policy project by volunteering to be a poll victim for zogby you can sign up at:

http://www.zogby.com/mpp.org

below is the copy of the email I got from MPP:

Subject: MPP to partner with Zogby International Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 15:50:48 +0000 From: Marijuana Policy Project To: mppupdates@igc.topica.com

Dear Friend,

Have you ever wondered how polling firms can release national polling data on a daily basis, yet you have never been called once for your opinion?

Or, perhaps you have been called, but you would rather give your opinions on-line rather than receiving phone calls from strangers during dinner.

Well, you now have a chance to change all this, make your opinions count, and help the Marijuana Policy Project get professional polling done for free!

MPP is teaming up with one of the nation's most accurate and prestigious polling organizations, Zogby International, in a groundbreaking project to integrate and align Internet polling surveys with traditional telephone survey polling.

Zogby International is developing an on-line population of civic- minded individuals who can assist in producing the most reliable, accurate, and scientific on-line polling available. Registering for participation in Zogby on-line polls gives you an opportunity to have your opinions counted, and it will benefit MPP in a big way.

For every 500 registrants we supply, Zogby will place a marijuana polling question for MPP in one of its nationwide polls -- both on- line and via traditional telephone survey methods. Each question would normally cost MPP $1,000 or more. With more than 12,000 people now subscribed to this MPPupdates e-mail list, we have the opportunity to get $1,000's worth of free survey research -- research that could greatly benefit our effort to end the war on marijuana users.

To sign up now to participate in Zogby's on-line polls, go to http://www.zogby.com/mpp.org

Zogby International promises complete confidentiality, plus a free polling survey product for those who register. You will usually receive an e-mail notification of two polls a month, which will take just a few minutes each to complete.

We're excited by the chance to work with "Zogby Interactive," the Internet extension of Zogby International, to provide you this opportunity and outlet to express your own views, hopes, and opinions on an array of topics.

Upon completion of the registration form, you will be eligible to receive a free Zogby International informational product of your choice. And you'll help earn free polling questions for MPP.

Feel free to forward this message to any of your friends you think may be interested in registering their opinions. By signing on at the above URL, they'll count toward MPP's free polling questions also.

Thank you for your help, Rob Kampia Executive Director Marijuana Policy Project

P.S. Please visit http://www.zogby.com/mpp.org right now, and pass this message along to your friends and colleagues.

-- end --


14 posted on 05/24/2004 5:49:02 PM PDT by Dales
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Radix

Zogby was kicked around badly on FR before the 2000 election but he was closer than anyone else to picking it right.


15 posted on 05/24/2004 5:54:13 PM PDT by Straight Vermonter (06/07/04 - 1000 days since 09/11/01)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
He markets well.

And if you poll both ways, you are going to always be able to point to your right answers ;-)

16 posted on 05/24/2004 5:56:13 PM PDT by Dales
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

To: Dales
I'll note them in my blog though.

Please add this FReeper to your Blog link ping thing, if you have one.

I enjoy reading your stuff!

Thank You!

18 posted on 05/24/2004 6:01:35 PM PDT by Radix (Vote for the Democrat and you will get Cash and Kerry!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: QuokkaPerth

Welcome to FreeRepublic. You don't happen to make boxes do you?


19 posted on 05/24/2004 6:03:17 PM PDT by AmishDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Radix
I don't ping when I update the blog- I do that too often :-)

You can just visit whenever right here.

20 posted on 05/24/2004 6:13:05 PM PDT by Dales
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

CAUTION FOLKS: THIS IS ANOTHER SET OF JUNK POLLS FROM ZOGBY.

This time via online

ZOGBY INTERACTIVE


21 posted on 05/24/2004 6:13:36 PM PDT by KQQL (@)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: QuokkaPerth

Horse hockey - welcome to Free Republic.

Put me down for a dozen cardboard boxes and a roll of tape.


22 posted on 05/24/2004 6:14:39 PM PDT by SteelTrap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: TheModerateMan
I don't trust zogby polls, they were way off in 2002.

They were way off in 2000, as well. Very few of his state polls were anywhere close, just his composite - which suggests an accident.

23 posted on 05/24/2004 6:15:35 PM PDT by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter
Zogby was kicked around badly on FR before the 2000 election but he was closer than anyone else to picking it right.

Only in his composite. His state-by-state was all over the place.

24 posted on 05/24/2004 6:17:00 PM PDT by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: KQQL
It isn't looking great for Bush at the moment. He can turn it around, but he needs to do something to do that.

Should Kerry win, and the Dems take the Senate and House, then our stock market would be much like the Indian stock market last week. Geez. I don't think the Dems have a great shot at the house, particularly with redistricting in Texas, but if Bush keeps wallowing in the polls, the Dems could sweep. Then your investments are going to be in the toilet...

25 posted on 05/24/2004 6:20:25 PM PDT by Koblenz (There's usually a free market solution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dales

I used to take part in those polls, and you would be surprised how many ethnicities I claimed at one time or another.

To me, it's just a slightly more scientific internet poll than the ones MSNBC etc. conduct on their websites that get freeped regularly.


26 posted on 05/24/2004 6:26:10 PM PDT by perez24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Dales

I think Zog tries to correct the participants per his little internal weighting system. Still, the sample is by no means random. Bush is losing everywhere, except Iowa, per the polls. LOL.


27 posted on 05/24/2004 6:26:34 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Comment #28 Removed by Moderator

To: QuokkaPerth

Click on Battleground States near the top of the page to the right, and then use your cursor to scan over the usual suspect states. You know, Florida, Ohio, Penn, Wisconsin, Nevada, New Hampshire, etc. Tennessee is included for some odd reason, where Bush has a narrow lead.


29 posted on 05/24/2004 6:30:19 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: KQQL; Dales; Torie; ambrose; GraniteStateConservative; BlackRazor
Here are the numbers from this WSJ interactive link.

Zogby Interactive polls conducted May 18-23:

ARKANSAS
Bush: 49.3%
Kerry: 44.5%
Nader: 1.2%
MOE: ±4.5 pct pts

FLORIDA
Bush: 47.6%
Kerry: 49.0%
Nader: 1.0%
MOE: ±3.4 pct pts

IOWA
Bush: 50.1%
Kerry: 44.9%
Nader: 0.8%
MOE: ±4.0 pct pts

MICHIGAN
Bush: 41.2%
Kerry: 49.5%
Nader: 2.4%
MOE: ±4.0 pct pts

MINNESOTA
Bush: 42.0%
Kerry: 51.3%
Nader: 3.4%
MOE: ±3.2 pct pts

MISSOURI
Bush: 43.9%
Kerry: 47.2%
Nader: 2.1%
MOE: ±4.3 pct pts

NEVADA
Bush: 43.5%
Kerry: 47.3%
Nader: 2.8%
MOE: ±4.3 pct pts

NEW HAMPSHIRE
Bush: 39.9%
Kerry: 49.5%
Nader: 2.2%
MOE: ±4.3 pct pts

NEW MEXICO
Bush: 43.3%
Kerry: 48.4%
Nader: 2.9%
MOE: ±4.6 pct pts

OHIO
Bush: 44.8%
Kerry: 49.4%
Nader: 0.9%
MOE: ±4.1 pct pts

OREGON
Bush: 44.3%
Kerry: 49.7%
Nader: 2.9%
MOE: ±3.2 pct pts

PENNSYLVANIA
Bush: 42.6%
Kerry: 50.8%
Nader: 1.8%
MOE: ±3.8 pct pts

TENNESSEE
Bush: 49.3%
Kerry: 46.8%
Nader: 0.6%
MOE: ±3.0 pct pts

WASHINGTON
Bush: 44.4%
Kerry: 52.5%
Nader: 1.3%
MOE: ±4.3 pct pts

WEST VIRGINIA
Bush: 48.3%
Kerry: 45.9%
Nader: 2.0%
MOE: ±4.4 pct pts

WISCONSIN
Bush: 43.7%
Kerry: 51.9%
Nader: 1.4%
MOE: ±3.4 pct pts

30 posted on 05/24/2004 6:36:17 PM PDT by AntiGuv (When the countdown hits zero - something's gonna happen..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KQQL

The only people who believe polls are Liberals and Democrats anyway. Poll dreck is the byproduct of Liberal insecurity, imo.


31 posted on 05/24/2004 6:45:11 PM PDT by Darheel (Visit the strange and wonderful.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dales
Just for the record, this is how Zogby's tracking polls held up in 2000.

California

Zogby: Bush 44%; Gore 47%
Actual: Bush 42%; Gore 54%

Florida

Zogby: Bush 46%; Gore 48%
Actual: Bush 49%; Gore 49%

Illinois

Zogby: Bush 43%; Gore 50%
Actual: Bush 43%; Gore 55%

Michigan

Zogby: Bush 45%; Gore 51%
Actual: Bush 46%; Gore 51%

Missouri

Zogby: Bush 48%; Gore 47%
Actual: Bush 50%; Gore 47%

New York

Zogby: Bush 39%; Gore 53%
Actual: Bush 35%; Gore 60%

Ohio

Zogby: Bush 50%; Gore 43%
Actual: Bush 50%; Gore 46%

Pennsylvania

Zogby: Bush 42%; Gore 50%
Actual: Bush 46%; Gore 51%

Tennessee

Zogby: Bush 52%; Gore 45%
Actual: Bush 51%; Gore 47%

Washington

Zogby: Bush 43%; Gore 50%
Actual: Bush 46%; Gore 50%

Wisconsin

Zogby: Bush 46%; Gore 46%
Actual: Bush 48%; Gore 48%

32 posted on 05/24/2004 6:55:41 PM PDT by AntiGuv (When the countdown hits zero - something's gonna happen..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Dales; ambrose

I just thought you may want to be mindful of his record when you choose to dismiss his polling..

Of course, his misfires are also notorious - the 2002 midterms in particular.


33 posted on 05/24/2004 7:00:13 PM PDT by AntiGuv (When the countdown hits zero - something's gonna happen..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: QuokkaPerth

QuokkaPerth
Since May 22, 2004


34 posted on 05/24/2004 7:02:48 PM PDT by dc-zoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: KQQL
No one polled me.
35 posted on 05/24/2004 7:03:53 PM PDT by katz (Sorry, sorry, sorry, sorry.............I'm tired of being sorry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: QuokkaPerth

Real inspired thinking. And if Bush wins what does it mean? Six months before the election and you can already predict the how the war in Iraq will go. You must be rich with your clairvoyant abilities.


36 posted on 05/24/2004 7:13:50 PM PDT by lp boonie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: TheModerateMan
I don't trust zogby polls, they were way off in 2002.

That's very good news because he won the prize in 2000. Do you have some good examples?

37 posted on 05/24/2004 7:15:53 PM PDT by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv

Actual Zogby polls are sauced and Crap.

INTERACTIVE AS CRAPOLA


38 posted on 05/24/2004 7:19:17 PM PDT by KQQL (@)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv

Actual Zogby polls are sauced and Crap.

INTERACTIVE ARE CRAPOLA


39 posted on 05/24/2004 7:19:26 PM PDT by KQQL (@)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv

Kerry ahead in Nevada???? Yeah, right....


40 posted on 05/24/2004 7:22:57 PM PDT by Tuxedo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv

Almost everything was in the margin of error, and when it wasn't he actually overstated Bush's results more than Gore.


41 posted on 05/24/2004 7:26:53 PM PDT by lasereye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

Comment #42 Removed by Moderator

To: AntiGuv
You should read up on the differences between Zogby International and Zogby Interactive polls. That's problem one with trying to take this as anything more than an interesting thing to note.

Also, some of your numbers below are wrong (such as California, where the final Zogby poll had it tied.)

Link.

Zogby's accuracy record is subpar.

To wit:

Coleman (R) 45% Mondale (D) 51% Zogby 11/3-11/4 (Mondale did not even come close)

Allard (R) 46% Strickland (D) 51% Zogby 11/2-11/4 (Allard won comfortably)

Cornyn (R) 50% Kirk (D) 46% Zogby 11/3-11/4 50% 46% (Cornyn won huge)

Chambliss (R) 47% Cleland (D) 50% Zogby 11/3-11/4 (Cleland lost comfortably)

Thune (R) 52% Johnson (D) 47% Zogby 11/3-11/4 (It was a Johnson win by less than 1)

Talent (R) 53% Carnahan (D) 45% Zogby 11/3-11/4 (It was a 1 point race)

More.

And also:

Let me provide some details. If his polling methodology was superior to his competitors, this would have translated to success at the state levels (especially since to get a good national picture, one would have to have a good geographical balance in the sample). Mr. Zogby was all over the place on the state battles.

More

And finally:

In 1998, Zogby was out on a limb by his lonesome, predicting an Al D'Amato win in New York and a Carol Mosley-Braun win in Illinois. The limb broke.
More.

You would be hard pressed to find a single pollster who has had so many high profile races so completely wrong from 1998 onward. He's been right sometimes, and he's been wrong sometimes. He just happens to be wrong more than most pollsters. Throw on top of it doing online sampling, where people have to choose themselves first, and thanks but no thanks.

43 posted on 05/24/2004 7:34:27 PM PDT by Dales
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: KQQL
Zoggy has an agenda. I read recently that polls were invented to influence public opinion to begin with. This election makes that evident.
44 posted on 05/24/2004 7:37:11 PM PDT by ladyinred (Torture is what happened to Nick Berg!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred

So does CBS


45 posted on 05/24/2004 7:37:55 PM PDT by KQQL (@)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Dales

The numbers I gave were not the Zogby International figures but rather the Zogby Interactive figures from 2000.

You are correct, the final Zogby International figure for California on 11/4-6 had Bush and Gore tied at 45%-45%; the final Zogby Interactive poll on 11/3-5 had Gore leading Bush 47%-44% as I posted.

It is entirely your prerogative to dismiss Zogby's polling as you deem fit, but simply keep in mind that his 2000 record suggests you do so at your 'peril'...


46 posted on 05/24/2004 7:39:01 PM PDT by AntiGuv (When the countdown hits zero - something's gonna happen..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

Comment #47 Removed by Moderator

To: Dales
PS. I already mentioned that Zogby had some notorious misfires. I have no problem with criticizing Zogby to your heart's content. I am hardly a Zogby advocate per se. What I do have a problem with is people picking & choosing polls* at their convenience and then claiming objectivity.

* leaving aside partisan polls.

48 posted on 05/24/2004 7:42:58 PM PDT by AntiGuv (When the countdown hits zero - something's gonna happen..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Dales

Oh, and having said that I should also add that I have no great problem with rejecting this particular methodology out of hand. Like I said, I just think one should be mindful of the record in the course of doing so.

There will be plenty of polls to work with from these states even excluding Zogby's tracking, so whatever!


49 posted on 05/24/2004 7:46:06 PM PDT by AntiGuv (When the countdown hits zero - something's gonna happen..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv
I'll take his word at what he said 2 months ago:
"Released: March 18, 2004

This Zogby Interactive poll is a test and reflects only the opinions of those registered online users who have chosen to participate. The results cannot nor should be assumed to represent the opinions of U.S. voters in general or the public as a whole. We hope to be able to provide statistically reliable interactive polls in the near future."

Link

His 1998 and 2002 records beg to differ with you about "at your peril".

And his 2000 tracking polls were not the online polls he is doing now- and I still suspect that you have the wrong numbers for a few of those states although I do suppose it is possible Newsmax does.

And I stand by my assertion- his 2000 accuracy was nothing to write home about. He completely blew California. He blew New York. His polls were making wild swings beyond the margin of error that no other pollster was seeing. He had more states outside the margin of error than can be explained by random chance-- and that was in a year he was doing well. In 2002, he missed most of the key races. Not one or two- most.

50 posted on 05/24/2004 7:51:35 PM PDT by Dales
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-94 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson