USA TODAY/CNN/GALLUP Poll Shows Bush Leading Kerry in Ohio

[ProgressiveOne]

MCLEAN, Va., Sept. 8 /PRNewswire/ -- USA TODAY/CNN/GALLUP have released the results of a poll of likely voters in the battleground state of Ohio. The results show that of 661 likely voters in that state, George W. Bush leads with 52% of the vote to John Kerry's 43% of the vote, with Ralph Nader getting 2% of the vote. In a poll conducted in July prior to the political conventions, Kerry led with 51% of the vote to Bush's 45%.

Ah, shit. This one hurts.

Link: USA TODAY/CNN/GALLUP Poll Shows Bush Leading Kerry in Ohio

[Catfight]

1. it's the false sense of safety Bush will feel before the storm blows

him out of the state for good!

[coloradodem2005]

2. I think that we can say that Gallup is unreliable.

Other polls have Kerry slightly ahead in Ohio.

[ProgressiveOne]

3. I wish I could agree...

Gallup was the most accurate pollster in the 2000 election. I've had a bad feeling all week about the polls, and this didn't help.

[mourningdove92]

6. NO, Gallup was not the most reliable.

We have several different polls today. Cherry pick which ever one you want to make the points you want.

[coloradodem2005]

7. I would have thought Zogby is the most reliable.

n/t

[Ohio rules]

13. I was told that Zogby

is the only poll that matters.

[mourningdove92]

15. me too.

[last_texas_dem]

40. Zogby

I generally trust Zogby because they were the only poll that showed Gore winning the popular vote in the 2000 election. That shows accuracy to me; sure, it could have been a fluke, but some of the other organizations (Gallup may have been the one) showed the Chimp leading by as much as three points.

Zogby has had some weird flunctuations(sp?) in their polls in the past. (I think during a two week period of the Wellstone-Coleman '02 race the results once swung like 17 pts. in Wellstone's favor.) But these can sometimes show simply how truly undecided the electorate is. Plus, Zogby seems to poll more often than other organizations which makes them better, in my view, for observing long-term trends in states.

[pmbryant]

8. Gallup certainly wasn't the most accurate in 2000

Gallup was all over the place. Its national polls would show Bush up 10 one day, Gore up 10 four days later, then Bush up 10 a few days after that. That ridiculous volatility in September and early October finally settled down into a fiarly steady Bush lead of 3-5 points in the last couple weeks.

That's obviously not how it turned out. Other polls were off by a similar amount in the end, but a few did a better job.

--Peter

[0rganism]

16. ZOGBY was the accurate pollster in the 2000 presidential election

He nailed the Gore popular vote win, when all the others were putting bush ahead by a handful.

The Wall Street Journal trusts Zogby, you should too.

Gallup is "Dewey Defeats Truman" territory.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

26. Bull. Nice try. Next.

[stickdog]

35. WRONG!

Why do so many people think they know things that they don't?

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh2genT.htm

[yardwork]

36. Some people know that the things they're saying aren't true

If you follow my reasoning....

[leesa]

48. You wish. Nice try.

[Downtown Hound]

55. Not true

Gallup was way off. Zogby was the most reliable. Gallup had Bush with a significant lead.

[drdtroit]

60. Likely voters

that has no credibility in this election as it does not take into account all of the new registries and the people who hadn't bothered voting before. Likely is someone who voted in the last 3 elections. Gimmee a break!

[lancdem]

22. Gallup's state polls aren't reliable

They show extreme swings. Kerry did not lose 15 points in Ohio. He was never ahead by 6 in the first place, and Bush is not ahead by that much now.

[bigwillq]

4. The only polls that matter

are on Nov. 2


Chill out everyone.

[aquart]

5. Likely voters does NOT include 18 year olds, does it?

So if the freshmen get off their asses and go to the polls, they change the course of the nation, save democracy, and give themselves a chance at real jobs some time before they're 60?

[ibegurpard]

9. Latest Rasmussen figures for Ohio:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x771169
Bush 48, Kerry 46.

Which to believe? I'd ignore them both and work like we're a couple of points behind and the extra effort would put us over the top.

[MallRat]

10. Where's their friggin' methodology info?

Until I see the underlying numbers (especially RVs and party-weighting), I'm not panicking.

-MR

[Walt Starr]

11. That's "likely voters". It's a poor methodology

Look at registered voters, Bush is only up by two, and the results they quote from just before the convention are registered voters, too.

It's more propping up of the chimp.

[The_Casual_Observer]

12. It has reversed a few times already. I'm not convinced.

This is one hell of a swing, it's clearly unstable.

[KansDem]

14. Correct me if I'm wrong...

...but as I recall, the polls had Bush ahead of Gore by a few points up to election eve 2000 and we all witnessed what happened then--Gore won by half a million votes.

[onehandle]

17. And......

We did not have such an active and pissed off base.

Bush will lose by millions this time.

[Larkspur]

19. Yes, but Gore lost the electoral college vote

If the election stays close, I think Bush Co. will steal it again.

[KansDem]

24. True...

However, the Internet and vigilance will play a major role in preventing such a theft from occurring again. Remember how befuddled Democrats were following the announcement by "news" stations of Gore as the winner of Florida, then withdrawing that announcement and calling Florida for the Governor's brother? I remember thinking to myself, "What the...?" I was genuinely confused, but still accepted what was being touted by the "reporters" in the hours following the "official" announcement that Bush won. The idea of an election theft NEVER entered my trusting mind.

That twinge of naïveté is long gone. If the the GOP tries to steal it again, there'll be Hell to pay...! :grr:

[Media_Lies_Daily]

25. No, Gore DID NOT lose the Electoral College vote....

...that was STOLEN from him in Florida, remember?

Where were you in December 2000 when the SCOTUS voted 5-4 to illegally select FratBoy as the new occupant of the White House?

How do some people so quickly forget an event that has led us to where we are today? Anybody have an answer?

[Marthe48]

33. NEVER FORGET!

nt

[Yupster]

23. But then the DWI came out the Friday before

the election, and Zogby's last poll picked up a last shift away from Bush of the undecideds by more than 2x1.

[West Coast Democrat]

18. But tied in Registered Voters?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x770908

[bushalert]

20. BOTTOM LINE : BUSH IS AHEAD IN OHIO

Unfortunately, it will take lots of work and a smart. aggressive campaign for Kerry to win Ohio at this point.

[0rganism]

27. Or.... IS he?....

Rasmussen Sept. 1 - Sept. 8 tracking

OHIO: Kerry 48%, Bush 46%

Bush favorables: 49 favorable, 49 unfavorable
Kerry favorables: 53 favorable, 45 unfavorable

Breakdown by Party ID:
GOP: Bush 89, Kerry 9
DEM: Kerry 86, Bush 11
OTHER: Kerry 50, Bush 32

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x771169

But I agree in spirit -- Kerry should be focusing his campaign on Ohio and Penssylvania. Those are the states that will put him over the top.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

28. Baloney.

[mad_hatter]

21. Screw em

Let em lose another 100,000 jobs over the next four year. I give up on these narrow minded fools

[progressivebydesign]

29. Ah.. smaller sample sizes again..

660 people do not a consensus make. I love how the pollsters are getting smaller and smaller samples. NO f-ing way Kerry is down that much in Ohio. No way. Not with the total job meltdown there... people in OHio aren't stupid, are they?

[mconvente]

30. Yes, 660 respondents is too low

There is no way that is correct. Remember a few weeks ago when the LA Times reported Bush led in California but 2%. Well look where we are now - Kerry still leading by 8%-10%. Though it's statistically improbable, it still is possible for random phone calls to produce skewed results (anyone with a knowledge of programming can quickly produce a weighted program in VB or Java to emulate the responses of 660 voters. Give Kerry 46% weight and Bush 48% weight based on current CNN polls reported here on DU and then run a sample of 660 "votes"). Though it's a low percentage, there will be times when one candidate will have a sizeable lead over the other just based on random chance (IE - Bush now in Ohio. There's now way that after Ohio residents saw Zell Miller's bullshit speech that all of a sudden there's a 7+% swing in voters, as these polls were taken before Bush's speech. Plus the folks at http://www.electoral-vote.com show Kerry with a true lead or at least a percentage lead within the margin of error for almost all swing states, even WITHOUT Ohio as of now. I think we can and will do this!

[Marthe48]

31. Still an awful lot of people support Kerry

I'm volunteering at the local Dem headquarters, (Marietta OH) and every Wed. the last 3 weeks I've been there, a steady stream of people come in, all ages, all backgrounds, not just wanting buttons, signs, bumper stickers, but venting (to put it mildly) about Iraq, the economy, education, retirement, job loss, 911 cover-up. There are people coming in to volunteer too. We live in S. Ohio in a sort of repub enclave surrounded by Dems. My neighbor says that all she sees when she walks are Kerry-Edwards signs. Today on the evening news, one of the long-time local companies announced its closing--300 MORE jobs lost from this area plus all the others in the last couple of yrs --that kind of news isn't going to help Bush anywhere. Although there are a lot of misguided people out there who somehow think they are still loyal to their parents' Republican party.

[acmavm]

32. Nuts.

.

[snippy]

34. This poll is a reflection of how Gallup identifies "likely voters"

and of the fact that when the poll was taken more republicans than democrats probably were identified as likely voters.

When Gallup includes "likely voters" as a subset of registered voters it bases the determination of likely voters on responses to a series of seven questions. The answers to those seven questions by each respondent result in a numerical score being assigned to that respondent. All respondents then are ranked by this score from most likely to vote to least likely to vote.

Gallop then estimates the probable turnout percentage for the population being sampled (in this case registered voters in Ohio). That estimated turnout percentage then is applied to the ranking of registered voters and used to determine a cutoff point for likely voters. So if turnout was estimated to be 53% then the 53% of respondents with the highest likely voter score are included in the results of the poll of likely voters and the 47% of respondents with lower scores are not. Since this poll was taken shortly after the republican convention, more republicans probably had a higher likely turnout score.

This poll and the Gallup methodology illustrates the importance of turnout and the fact that no pollster knows how to identify a likely voter. If turnout is high and includes many first time voters any poll that is accurate will owe much of its accuracy to luck.

[daleo]

43. Interesting information on the likely voter methodology.

I didn't know the specifics of this. It certainly sounds like there is plenty of room to 'adjust' a methodology like this, and get a result that is favorable to a given candidate. Given the rightward leaning of most news media and allied corporations it doesn't take a lot of imagination to see how this is likely to be applied. It becomes ever more critical to take into account the biases and history of the polling organization.

[0007]

37. LOL! Kerry will carry Ohio, trust me!

[roseBudd]

45. Hamilton County has 38,000 new voters registered

and Cincinnati is 43% black

[Xavi]

49. Yeah and the Kerry campaign

has a huge voter registration drive going on. I don't know if they're doing it all over the country, but I'm sure they are, and "likely voters" doesn't count all the new people who have been registered.

[robo]

38. poll

I'm from Cincinnati and i have seen more Kerry stickers here than i have seen in any election , Ohio is going to be up for grabs!

[IconoclastIlene]

39. What in the HELL do you expect; Ohio, KENT STATE-4 DEAD

OHIO NATIONAL GUARDSMEN GOT A LITTLE TRIGGER HAPPY AND FOUR WERE DEAD.

Ohio is has been brain dead all these years, screw them all.

[JoFerret]

41. 661 likely voters chosen

before the current sense of the actual potential electorate. Way off is my guess.

And...how are people feeling? Who is actually going to get out there and vote? Who is undercounted?

[The Blue Knight]

42. I live in Marion, Ohio--a county that's never gone Dem in a Prez race.

I'd believe if you told me Bush was winning Ohio, but not by that much. I stil am of firm belief that Kerry will carry Ohio. I've been to many Kerry rallies here, and it's ALWAYS packed with people enthusiastic about Kerry.

Also, I've met *A LOT* of people who have told me, "I've never voted before, but I registered just so I could vote GW out of office." And I bet there are a large amount of these people nationwide, which would taint this "likely voters" (which always seem to favor Republicans) bullshit.

[neonplaque]

44. I'm one of those!

At 36 and in Ohio- Last year: First-time registered, This year: First-time voter.
Thank you George for forcing me to perform my duty.

[yardwork]

52. Welcome to DU and thank you to all first-time voters!

It took Jesse Helms to get me to vote for the first time back in 1984. I haven't missed an election or primary or run-off since, and I always vote Democratic.

I like to think of myself as one small part of Jesse Helms's legacy.

[Z-E-R-0]

46. Bush is also leading in MO and PA

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/polls/2004-09-08-poll.htm

[mconvente]

50. I don't think that's accurate

http://www.electoral-vote.com has Kerry leading PA even after being tied or down for the last few days and Kerry is tied dead even at 49% with Bush in MO.

[Z-E-R-0]

53. But...

http://www.electoral-vote.com is using Zogby's internet poll. I don't think those are ever very accurate.

The biweekly Zogby poll of 16 battleground states taken Aug 30 to Sept 3 has now been released. It was taken during the RNC and many people were polled before Bush's acceptance speech, so it does not full reflect the post convention bounce (but see below). Neverthless, it is more recent than any other round of battleground state polls. Briefly summarized, it shows that Bush is gaining, but still has a ways to go. He now leads in four states compared to only two states in the Aug. 17-21 poll.

I have gotten e-mail from some people who don't trust Zogby, either because he uses a new technology (normalized Internet polling) or because they don't like his results or because he is personally a Democrat.

[0007]

51. Kerry will win Pennsylvania hands down, no doubt about it!

[leesa]

47. Not likely. Another whore media whack job.

[belle]

54. Guys, you know what: it's all in play.

I understand it's depressing, but anything can and probably will happen between now and Nov. 2. Chill.

[scarface2004]

56. gallup is full of shit!!

fuck him and the horse he rode in on!!

[foo_bar]

57. gallup's a dude?

[Bush was AWOL]

58. This poll is Bull shit!

I live in Upper Arlington (Columbus Area)-which is one of the wealthiest areas in the state of Ohio. There was an article in the local paper recently about how, to the surprise of Bush supporters, Kerry signs were outnumbering Bush signs nearly 2 to 1 in an area that, in the past, was considered a Republican stronghold. If folks living in 3 and 4 hundred thousand dollar houses think Bush needs to go, that can't be a good sign for him. Mark my words, Ohio is Kerry's!

[LisaL]

61. And I visit a very liberal area of Columbus

last election, I saw many Nader signs there. Now, I haven't seen one Nader sign there, it's all Kerry and Edwards.

[Only Me]

59. What I don't understand is what does MClean Va have to do with it, Mclean

is totally repug territory. Wonder why wasn't it a CNN or USA today poll or an Ohio newspaper or media poll?