Zogby: Kerry 322, Bush 216

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.

FILED UNDER: Campaign 2004, Public Opinion Polls
James Joyner
About James Joyner
James Joyner is a Security Studies professor at Marine Corps University's Command and Staff College and a nonresident senior fellow at the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security at the Atlantic Council. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm vet. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter @DrJJoyner.

Comments

  1. Attila Girl says:

    Can’t buy it. Arkansas? Florida? New Mexico? No.




    0



    0
  2. 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 . . .




    0



    0
  3. Ron says:

    I had a hard time continuing to read after “based on online polling…”




    0



    0
  4. Al says:

    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.)




    0



    0
  5. Dean Esmay says:

    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.




    0



    0
  6. bryan says:

    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…




    0



    0
  7. Matthew Ryan says:

    “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”

    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?




    0



    0
  8. ken Wheeler says:

    “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.”

    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?




    0



    0
  9. Don’t believe anybody who says that Tennessee is in play. It isn’t.




    0



    0