Ruy Teixeira points out historical polling trends favoring Kerry

[lancdem]

Thus, the question Gallup should have been asking is: can Kerry overcome his 1 point deficit among RVs by election day, based on historical patterns? Turns out the answer to this question--really, the only question that their data can properly answer--looks pretty darn good for Kerry.

In 17 of 17 cases, going back to 1936, the labor day margin between the candidates changed enough for Kerry to tie or surpass Bush in the popular vote and, in 12 of 17 of those cases, the change was in Kerry's direction (i.e., that is, in the direction of the candidate who was behind among RVs on labor day).

Moreover, if you compare Bush's position to the position of incumbent presidents who won their campaigns for re-election, it doesn't look auspicious. In 9 cases, going back to 1936, winning incumbent presidents on labor day had an average lead of 12 points and a median lead of 11 points among RVs. The only winning incumbent president who was in a worse position than Bush is this year was Harry Truman in 1948.

Maybe I'm biased, but I have a really hard time seeing George W. Bush as Harry Truman.

http://www.emergingdemocraticmajority.com

(He also excoriates Gallup for using LV numbers when they used RVs in the past.)