Posted on 10/02/2004 3:56:52 PM PDT by jwalsh07
They emphasized those "independent/uncommitted" voters CBSNBCABC managed to put into focus groups to be interviewed after the debate. They were truly diverse groups. Half favored Kerry, half opposed Bush.
You did! LOL ;^)
Yup!
Now Gallup that's a whole lot different....they've got an almost perfect track history!!!
Right, thats the point of this exercise, to demonstrate exactly that.
The electoral vote rules.
Wrong.
Ah hah! So Newsweek even admits it. I am a little surprised since what little I saw of Jon Meacham made it appear he was trying to be fair. He didn't seem to be a Kerry booster, like Eleanor (gee you're NOT swell-anor) Clift is. ;-)
So if the previous poll of Bush up by 11 is inaccurate, and the current poll of Kerry up 2 also is off the mark, then maybe we can split the difference and say Bush leads by 6 or so. Sounds like a good margin to me.
Or they oversambled dems this go round.
No Matter
After 4 years as an incumbent with a good economy Bush ought to be in the high 50s
Add in vote fraud and this election will be as bad or worse than 2000
America is in bad shape as a nation and it will take 20 years to get the schools back on track if that is possible At 68 years of age I feel sorry for my nieces and nephews etc
Phew, thanks, for a minute there I thought one of us was as whacky as a liberal loon. :-}
I don't think I'm wrong because I recall recently reading an interview with . . . I think Gallup in which they said party affiliation is NOT a demographic because it can change at will. It is not like age or gender or income. They don't target it.
Come now, if it was targetted, then these wildly varying party mix results we see from various polls would make no sense. The polls would target the same mix over and over again. There would be no need to count how many Dems/GOP/Ind are in a given poll because it would have been arranged to be the same mix all year long.
A lot of freepers were suspicious of the wide variance and indescrepancy in the polls. We suspected it was a setup for the debates and the proof is rolling in.
GWB was supposed to have his biggest advantage in the first debate on Iraq, and we all saw what happened there.
The next debate is supposed to work to Kerry's advantage. Domestic issues.
If Kerry was able to get under Bush's skin so much in the first debate, I'm almost afraid to see what he will do in the next.
I hope Bush can turn things around!
"...maybe we can split the difference and say Bush leads by 6 or so. Sounds like a good margin to me."
This is exactly what some very careful people were saying here all along.
A glass half full kind of guy, eh Bob? :-}
It's pretty clear NewsTweak put their thumb on the scale.
Bump for later reading.
You can always put the indies in the rat category too since that's how most of them vote.
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.