Bush takes lead in Washington Post Poll!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Bush takes lead in Washington Post Poll!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:03:18 PM EDT

Yesterday 49 Kerry 48 Bush... today Bush 49, Kerry 48!

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/elections/2004/charting.html

if you need a password for washingtonpost.com go to www.bugmenot.com

This was the only national poll Kerry was leading in and has shown three days of a Kerry downturn and Bush upward movement!

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:09:07 PM EDT

[#1]

Here are ALL the major national polls!

ABC/Wash Post (1747 LV)* 10/25 - 10/27 49% 48% 1% Bush +1
Reuters/Zogby (1206 LV) 10/25 - 10/27 48% 46% 1% Bush +2
TIPP (792 LV) 10/24 - 10/27 47% 44% 2% Bush +3
ICR (741 LV) 10/22 - 10/26 48% 45% 2% Bush +3
CNN/USAT/Gallup (1195 LV) 10/22 - 10/24 51% 46% 1% Bush +5
Los Angeles Times (881 LV) 10/21 - 10/24 48% 48% 1% TIE
Newsweek (880 LV) 10/21 - 10/22 48% 46% 1% Bush +2

LA Times is working off week old data... woot!

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:09:36 PM EDT

[#2]

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:10:13 PM EDT

[#3]

Come ON, Tuesday! GET HERE already!

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:11:09 PM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
Come ON, Tuesday! GET HERE already!

+1000

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:12:33 PM EDT

[#5]

According to Hannity, Bush is up 8 in FL, up 2 in PA and tied in NJ.

I like the trend.

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:13:56 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
According to Hannity, Bush is up 8 in FL, up 2 in PA and tied in NJ.

I like the trend.

Like the technical traders say: The trend is your friend.

At least this one is.

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:15:21 PM EDT

[#7]

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:18:20 PM EDT

[#8]

That is damn good news. I get the feeling that all of these tracking polls are just bouncing around their margin of error. It is the trend that is important!

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:18:29 PM EDT

[#9]

For what it's worth you missed this one
www.time.com/time/election2004/article/0,18471,733715,00.html?cnn=yes

I dig the good news, but everyday this shit is teetering back and forth. I'm gonna be the next person to throw a brick, and I quit smoking 8 years ago.

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:21:18 PM EDT

[#10]

Not a bad turn-around for a tracking poll.

Now don't forget to vote.

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:24:17 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
For what it's worth you missed this one
www.time.com/time/election2004/article/0,18471,733715,00.html?cnn=yes

I dig the good news, but everyday this shit is teetering back and forth. I'm gonna be the next person to throw a brick, and I quit smoking 8 years ago.

yup, I'm just pulling the numbers off of realclearpolitics.com

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:28:20 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
That is damn good news. I get the feeling that all of these tracking polls are just bouncing around their margin of error. It is the trend that is important!

While most are within the MOE... let me state this with 100% conviction, if they were neck and neck and there was no true lead you would see the polls split between the candidates. The fact that they are all in our column except one tie is an indication that there is a definitive Bush lead and it is large enough that it is registering in all polls, albeit at a different level. You can not have this consistant of a trend if the lead is not there.

This is EVERY major national poll since October 1... tell me there is not a clear and consistant Bush edge!

Reuters/Zogby (1206 LV) 10/25 - 10/27 48% 46% 1% Bush +2
ABC/Wash Post (1747 LV)* 10/24 - 10/27 49% 48% 1% Bush +1
TIPP (792 LV) 10/24 - 10/27 47% 44% 2% Bush +3
ICR (741 LV) 10/22 - 10/26 48% 45% 2% Bush +3
CNN/USAT/Gallup (1195 LV) 10/22 - 10/24 51% 46% 1% Bush +5
Los Angeles Times (881 LV) 10/21 - 10/24 48% 48% 1% TIE
Newsweek (880 LV) 10/21 - 10/22 48% 46% 1% Bush +2
Time (803 LV) 10/19 - 10/21 51% 46% 2% Bush +5
GW/Battleground (1000 LV) 10/18 - 10/21 49% 45% 1% Bush +4
AP-Ipsos (976 LV) 10/18 - 10/20 46% 49% 2% Kerry +3
Marist (772 LV w/leaners) 10/17 - 10/19 49% 48% 1% Bush +1
FOX News (1000 LV) 10/17 - 10/18 49% 42% 2% Bush +7
Pew Research (1070 LV) 10/15 - 10/19 47% 47% 1% TIE
ABC/Wash Post* (1237 LV) 10/16 - 10/18 51% 46% 1% Bush +5
NBC/WSJ (LV w/leaners) 10/16 - 10/18 48% 48% 1% TIE
Harris (820 LV)** 10/14 - 10/17 49.5% 44.5% 1% Bush +5
CBS/NY Times (678 LV) 10/14 - 10/17 47% 45% 2% Bush +2
CNN/USAT/Gallup (788 LV) 10/14 - 10/16 52% 44% 1% Bush +8
Time (865 LV w/leaners) 10/14 - 10/15 48% 47% 3% Bush +1
Newsweek (880 LV) 10/14 - 10/15 50% 44% 1% Bush +6
GW/Battleground (1000 LV) 10/11 - 10/14 49% 46% 0% Bush +3
ABC/Wash Post* (1248 LV) 10/11 - 10/13 48% 48% 1% TIE
Zogby (1223 LV) 10/9 - 10/11 45% 45% 2% TIE
CBS News (760 LV) 10/9 - 10/11 48% 45% 2% Bush +3
ICR (763 LV) 10/9 - 10/11 48% 43% 2% Bush +5
CNN/USAT/Gallup (793 LV) 10/9 - 10/10 48% 49% 1% Kerry +1
Time (886 LV w/leaners) 10/6 - 10/7 46% 45% 4% Bush +1
GW/Battleground (1250 LV) 10/3 - 10/7 49% 46% 0% Bush +3
AP/Ipsos (944 LV)*** 10/4 - 10/6 46% 50% 2% Kerry +4
Marist (642 LV) 10/4 - 10/5 49% 46% 1% Bush +3
Fox News (1000 LV) 10/3 - 10/4 47% 45% 1% Bush +2
ICR (762 LV)***** 10/1 - 10/5 51% 45% 2% Bush +6
ARG (800 LV) 10/2 - 10/4 46% 46% 2% TIE
ABC News/WP (1169 LV) 10/1 - 10/3 51% 46% 1% Bush +5
CBS News/NYT (561 LV) 10/1 - 10/3 47% 47% 1% TIE
Zogby (1036 LV) 10/1 - 10/3 46% 43% 2% Bush +3
Pew Research (801 LV) 10/1 - 10/3 49% 44% 2% Bush +5
CNN/USAT/Gallup (772 LV) 10/1 - 10/3 49% 49% 1% TIE

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:29:31 PM EDT

[#13]

I hate to rain on everyone's parade, but from a mathematical standpoint, most of these poll numbers cannot tell us who is ahead. It would take a very, very long time to explain the math behind it, but if any of the polls are within the margin of error, the the poll cannot tell you anything. If it's 48% to 46% with margin of error of 3%, then you cannot say the person with 48% is ahead.

Besides that, many statisticians believe that modern phone polls are systemically flawed, even beyond the sample error.

With a race this close, only the election results themselves count. All others are bad estimates.

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:29:48 PM EDT

[#14]

At this point, I consider the National Polls to be almost irrelevant.
All I care about NOW, is seeing solid Bush trends in FLA, OH, MN, WI, CO, etc..

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:30:58 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
Quoted:
That is damn good news. I get the feeling that all of these tracking polls are just bouncing around their margin of error. It is the trend that is important!

While most are within the MOE... let me state this with 100% conviction, if they were neck and neck and there was no true lead you would see the polls split between the candidates. The fact that they are all in our column except one tie is an indication that there is a definitive Bush lead and it is large enough that it is registering in all polls, albeit at a different level. You can not have this consistant of a trend if the lead is not there.

If you know your stats, you would see that HiramRanger is correct. Under the Central Limit Theorem, the mean of several sample means is likely to be the true mean. If this were truly tied, we should see about half the polls with Kerry ahead.

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:36:04 PM EDT

[#16]

Thanks Paeber, I hated my statistics classes and polling methodology classes. I grasped the concepts and can read the tea leaves very well. I can write the questions but somebody else has to crunch the numbers in terms of establishing the model to make it as representative as possible (my weak point), but I'll look at the numbers and tell you where they are going. I need to bone up on my statistics, its been 10 years since I've done any of the crunching myself, I don't even know if they use Statgraphics and SPSS software packages anymore.

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:37:05 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
That is damn good news. I get the feeling that all of these tracking polls are just bouncing around their margin of error. It is the trend that is important!

While most are within the MOE... let me state this with 100% conviction, if they were neck and neck and there was no true lead you would see the polls split between the candidates. The fact that they are all in our column except one tie is an indication that there is a definitive Bush lead and it is large enough that it is registering in all polls, albeit at a different level. You can not have this consistant of a trend if the lead is not there.

If you know your stats, you would see that HiramRanger is correct. Under the Central Limit Theorem, the mean of several sample means is likely to be the true mean. If this were truly tied, we should see about half the polls with Kerry ahead.

Correct...

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:40:32 PM EDT

[#18]

Here is another excellent read on polling in general and why Zogby is a hack:
jaycost.blogspot.com/

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:41:40 PM EDT

[#19]

The trend is your friend right up until it is not.

The trend is a fickle beast and it is always good to have backup or an escape plan.

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:42:26 PM EDT

[#20]

Hold on tight, most of the national polls gave Bush a lead in 2000.

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:43:26 PM EDT

[#21]

Be careful with the Central Limit Theorem. It requires each of the independent random variables to be identically distributed. Multiple polls from multiple sources at different times may not be. (meaning, different methodology).

If I took 10 polls today in the same city in the same method, then what you are saying is correct.

I should add the caveat that if you use more advanced and more generalized limiting theorems, you can make at least some conclusions. However, if someone has performed the analysis using these methods, and got useful results out of it, then I expect it would be headline news.

I don't have my stats books handy, so I don't want to get into a big arguement.

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:48:07 PM EDT

[#22]

I cannot WAIT to get this election done and over with so I can adorn my truck with bumper stickers mocking John Kerry's shady lifelong record - I'm active duty military and once Kerry completely leaves public office - I will make some comment on what a douchbag he is EVERY day.

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:50:57 PM EDT

[#23]

I believe you can Mock and bad mouth him all you want, until he's the president.
At least that's been my practice

.

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:51:57 PM EDT

[#24]

The trend is our friend

Posted: 10/28/2004 1:54:09 PM EDT

[#25]

Oddly enough, I work with several active duty members who have no problem bitching about Bush now.....but they are your typical - my P$SSY hurts and I need to ETS now types. You know - the sniveling whining b$tches that CAN'T handle military life - but think they know what is best for the military. Fuck all the p#ssies and especially their mentor John F----ing Kerry - soon to be just Mr Teresa Heinz...........