Zogby: Kerry 322, Bush 216
 |
James Joyner | Thursday, October 7, 2004 |
Barry Ritholtz passes on a word that a WSJ/Zogby poll has Kerry way up in the electoral college race, contradicting virtually every other poll known to mankind. For example, Slate’s projection two days ago had it Bush 348, Kerry 190.
A new WSJ.com projection of the Electoral College map, based on online polling done in 16 battleground states by Zogby Interactive, shows that under the survey’s current trends, and assuming Mr. Kerry wins states where he has razor-thin leads now, he would have 322 electoral votes and the president would have 216.
The current Zogby battleground projections:
While my instinct is to dismiss this as an outlier, Zogby does, as Barry notes, have an excellent track record. And Slate’s revised estimate drops Bush’s lead to 300 to 238. This demonstrates amazing volatility in the numbers.
Update: RealClear Politics, which factors in new polls almost daily, currently has it Bush 264 – Kerry 220. The trends–presumably reflecting the first debate–have been toward Kerry:
10/6: ME/CD2 – Leaning Kerry >> Toss Up (Bush 264 – Kerry 220)
10/6: PA – Toss Up >> Leaning Kerry (Bush 264 – Kerry 221)
10/6: OH – Leaning Bush >> Toss Up (Bush 264 – Kerry 200)
10/5: IA – Leaning Bush >> Toss Up (Bush 284 – Kerry 200)
9/30: PA – Leaning Kerry >> Toss Up (Bush 291 – Kerry 200)
9/26: PA – Toss Up >> Leaning Kerry (Bush 291 – Kerry 221)
9/23: IA – Toss Up >> Leaning Bush (Bush 291 – Kerry 200)
Presumably, a strong Bush showing Friday night will send the pendulum back the other way. Still, even with Pennslyvania in the Kerry column, Bush only needs to pick up six votes from among the toss-up states to hit the magic 270. If, for example, he picked up New Mexico’s 5 electors and the elector from Maine’s 2nd Congressional District, he would win even if Kerry added Ohio’s 20 electors, plus Minnesota’s 10, Oregon’s 7, Iowa’s 7, and New Hampshire’s 4.
About the Author: James Joyner is the publisher of Outside the Beltway and the managing editor of the Atlantic Council. He's a former Army officer, Desert Storm vet, and college professor with a PhD in political science from The University of Alabama. He lives just outside the Beltway in Alexandria, Virginia with his wife and infant daughter.
Follow James on FriendFeed | Twitter | Digg
- None Found
- Caption Contest Winners
- OTB Latenight – Styx
- Berlin Wall Fall: 20 Years Later
- Oklahoma High Schoolers Are Very Familiar With George Washington, Thanks
- Was Fort Hood Massacre ‘Terrorism’?
- Making Jobs More Expensive
- House Trades Freedom for Health Coverage, Senate’s Move
- Hasan a Muslim First, American Second?
- OTB Caption JamTM
- Taking “No” As Iran’s Answer
- ProfessorBainbridge.com linked with Electoral College Count
- King of Fools linked with Linkagery
- Dummocrats.com linked with Zogby: Kerry 322, Bush 216 (we're not buying it)
- Simon World linked with Enemablog
Can't buy it. Arkansas? Florida? New Mexico? No.
The table at the WSJ site shows five of the states credited to the Dems -- Arkanasas, Tennessee, Ohio, Nevada, Florida -- with a Kerry lead of less than the margin of error (MOE) -- that suggests the race is tighter than it initially appears in this study.
Back out the states within the MOE, and we pull out 68 electoral votes for Kerry (AK, FL, NV, OH, WI) and 22 electoral votes for Bush (MO, TN), for a total 254 to 194, in Kerry's favor. Much tighter than the initial WSJ overview makes it appear . . .
I had a hard time continuing to read after "based on online polling..."
While my instinct is to dismiss this as an outlier, Zogby does, as Barry notes, have an excellent track record.
When it comes to state-level polls like these, that's just plain false. Zogby may have done OK with a national poll in 2000, but he was by far the worst pollster at the state level in 2002. And you don't have to take my word for it, the National Council on Public Polls did a survey of pollsters: http://www.ncpp.org/2002SenGovPoll/2002ElectionPolls.html
When it comes to state level polls, Zogby is just plain bad.
(And this, of course, doesn't even get into the question of potential anti-Bush bias, given that his brother is head of the anti-Bush Arab-American Institute.)
At this point there is simply no question that Bush completely screwed up in the first debate, and is paying a terrible price for it.
I don't feel sorry for him.
Actually, the zogby poll isn't quite the "online poll" that we are thinking it is, but the methodology suggests it still suffers from big problems (weighting, self-selection) that make it less than useful. Of course, most of the polls that are out these days are less than useful, so...
"And this, of course, doesnât even get into the question of potential anti-Bush bias, given that his brother is head of the anti-Bush Arab-American Institute"
Nor the fact that Zogby called the election for Kerry back in May. Do you think he might be a little out on a limb?
"And this, of course, doesnât even get into the question of potential anti-Bush bias, given that his brother is head of the anti-Bush Arab-American Institute."
This does. Zogby is the house pollster for those liberal rags, the New York Post, and the Wall Street Journal, not to mention Reuters, the largest news agency in the world, all of whom care about both his methodology and bias.
Anyway, it's harder and harder to find pro-bush bias, as the depths of his mendacity and incompetence are revealed on a daily basis. Pity, he's such a compassionate uniter, and what do those Arabs know anyway?
Don't believe anybody who says that Tennessee is in play. It isn't.
Comments are Closed
