Kerry Gets No Bounce

[Franklinnoble]

I like leaving these thread titles open and ambiguous enough for the parody writers to have their way with them...

Story link... (http://usatoday.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=USATODAY.com+-+Poll%3A+No+boost+for+Kerry+after+convention&expire=&urlID=11186062&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fnews%2Fpoliticselections%2Fnation%2Fpresident%2F2004-08-01-poll-kerry_x.htm&partnerID=1660)

Poll: No boost for Kerry after convention By Susan Page, USA TODAY
Last week's Democratic convention boosted voters' impressions of John Kerry but failed to give him the expected bump in the head-to-head race against President Bush, a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll finds. (Related item: Poll results (http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/polls/usatodaypolls.htm))
<table class="sidebar" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr><td colspan="4">http://images.usatoday.com/_common/_images/clear.gif</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">http://images.usatoday.com/news/_photos/2004/08/02/kerry-inside.jpg</td><td rowspan="2">http://images.usatoday.com/_common/_images/clear.gif</td><td class="sidebar" valign="top" width="75">John Kerry campaigns Sunday in Bowling Green, Ohio.</td><td rowspan="2">http://images.usatoday.com/_common/_images/clear.gif</td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="bottom">By J.D. Pooley, Sentinel-Tribune</td></tr></tbody> </table> In the survey, taken Friday and Saturday, Bush led Kerry 50%-46% among likely voters. Independent candidate Ralph Nader was at 2%.

The survey showed Kerry losing 1 percentage point and Bush gaining 4 percentage points from a poll taken the week before the Boston convention.

The change in support was within the poll's margin of error of +/-4 percentage points in the sample of 763 likely voters. But it was nonetheless surprising, the first time since the chaotic Democratic convention in 1972 that a candidate hasn't gained ground during his convention. (Related PDF: Kerry-Edwards plan for America (http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/our_plan_for_america.pdf))

USA TODAY extended its survey to Sunday to get a fuller picture of what's happening.

A Newsweek poll taken Thursday and Friday gave the Democratic ticket a 49%-42% lead. Over three weeks, that reflected a 4-point "bounce" for Kerry, the smallest ever in the Newsweek poll.

Among registered voters in the USA TODAY poll, Kerry and Bush each had 47%. Bush was up 4 points, Kerry unchanged from the pre-convention survey.

Analysts said the lack of a bounce may reflect the intensely polarized contest. Nearly nine of 10 voters say their minds are made up and won't change. "The convention, typically a kicking-off point for a party, is now merely a reaffirmation" of where voters stand, said David Moore, senior editor of the Gallup Poll.

"In a race this tight, the polls are going to be all over the place," said Stephanie Cutter, Kerry's communications director. "Most importantly, voters now clearly trust John Kerry more than Bush to lead and defend America."

But Matthew Dowd, chief strategist for the Bush campaign, said "history doesn't bode well" for Kerry. Since World War II, the three challengers who have unseated presidents held clear leads after their conventions.

Democratic leaders have expressed delight about the convention, which showed a united party and emphasized national security. Those surveyed gave the convention and its candidate high marks:

Kerry's acceptance speech Thursday was rated as "excellent" by 26%, a more positive response than Bush got in 2000. A 44% plurality said the Democrats were "about right" in criticizing Bush; 30% said they went too far.

Views of Kerry's personal characteristics and leadership improved; views of Bush didn't change much. Bush's edge in handling terrorism was shaved to 12 points from 18. In a switch, Kerry now is trusted more to handle the responsibilities of commander in chief, by 51%-46%.

Kerry's military service is seen as a plus. A 52% majority says it would help him be an effective president. More than one in four say it makes them more likely to vote for him.

[Whar]

Well even the article you cite mentions a 4 point bounce in some polls. That poll was performed the day before and the day after Kerry's speech. It was intentionally performed to track his performance in that speech. If its numbers hold as accurate it represents an enormous swing for Kerry.

With so many voters already having determined their candidate a 4 point swing is big. If Kerry can hold those points or at least 2 of them thru to the Republican Convention it will be a significant win. (Especially considering the lack of spending the Kerry camp will be enduring in August in their effort to preserve parity with Bush for the final months of the campaign.)

It will be interesting to see if Bush gets much of a bump following his convention as well. If it exceeds Kerry's 4 points they he has a real shot in November. If it is less than that Bush has a big hill to climb to re-election.

[Easy Mac]

I'm not trying to be an ass, but what should these polls even mean? I mean, 763 out of 105 million people (the number who voted 4 years ago) can't be considered a representative sample. That doesn't even come close to being 1% of the voting populace. That would be like me being back in school and doing a study and asking questions, and asking a duck to fill out the survey and base it on that. I'm not saying the numbers are wrong, but that the poll is stupid.

[rkmsuf]

that convention was a joke. deserved no bounce.

[CamEdwards]

there's so much to take into consideration in these polls, and most of the polling organizations don't give you that information.

For instance: what's the party affiliation breakdown of those polled? There was an LA Times poll out last month that showed Kerry with an 8 point lead. Of course, the party affiliation breakdown was 38% Democrat to 25% Republican. There was a Harris poll out a week later that showed Bush with an 11 point lead. I tried and tried to get the affiliation breakdown, but never could get the Harris poll people to give it to me.

The other big thing to look for: "adults" vs. "likely voters" vs. "registered voters". The Newsweek poll was made up of "adults", not necessarily adults who will be voting.

[Easy Mac]

but never could get the Harris poll people to give it to me.
I haven't made a sex joke about Cam in a while.

[ISiddiqui]

I agree about the nature of polls. CNN poll had a 5 point bump, IIRC and others had their own bumps. It depends on who gets asked.

[sachmo71]

F the polls! Let's get it on!

[sabotai]

Polls were very accurate for the democratic primary, weren't they. Dean leads, Dean leads!! Dean gets crushed...what happened with those polls?

[sachmo71]

Polls were very accurate for the democratic primary, weren't they. Dean leads, Dean leads!! Dean gets crushed...what happened with those polls?

"...and California, and Washington! YHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!"


:D

[sabotai]

:D (After he was easily beat in Iowa though.)

[Ryan S]

There is only one poll that counts, and that is still three months away.

If I were asked my opinion in a poll like this, I would lie.

[Fritz]

F the polls! Let's get it on. Oh baby, let's get it on.

beware of your father

(unedited by popular demand)

[Franklinnoble]

we are all sensitive people Powerful Jedi was he...

***edit... dammit, Fritz... your edit renders my post senseless ****

[CentralMassHokie]

My favorite thing is that prior to the convention, there was an article quoting some members of the RNC talking about how they expected Kerry to get a 15 point boost coming out of the convention.

Which is insane - no candidate gets a 15 point boost, especially not with such a small % of undecideds.

But it was brilliant politics, because it leads to articles like this one, where they point to a 4 point boost and basically say it was nothing because it wasn't bigger.

Righties won't like the source, but here's a good debunking (at least in my mind):
http://angrybear.blogspot.com/2004/07/lying-liars-visiting-pandagon-i-re.html

[sachmo71]

we are all sensitive people

Unedit it, bitch. It's not funny this way. :(

[Arles]

Gore got a bounce of 8% across the board in 2000.

Here's Kerry's "bounce" in all the main polls:

ABC News/Washington Post Poll: +3%
American Research Group Poll: 0%
CBS News/New York Times Poll: 0%
CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll: -3%
Newsweek: +4%

However you slice, it's certainly well below the "8 to 12 point increase" Terry McAuliffe predicted on "Face the Nation".

[Daimyo]

Republicans are amazing at marketing. I guess this will be the latest talking point brought up 150 times per day.

[Franklinnoble]

I think Kerry has disappointed a lot of people. He had a chance to deliver a knockout punch to a wobbling incumbent, and instead, Bush got to his corner unfazed. I've read that Kerry's doing very little to no advertising during the month of August, for budgetary reasons. Bush, on the other hand, is not similarly constrained. Kerry could end up being buried by the Republican convention.

[Whar]

The only thing I am willing to bet money on in this upcoming election is the inability of either candidate to bury the other. Even with the deck stacked against him Bush will win ~220 electoral votes. Kerry in defeat will hold about the same.

With Bush's approval rating hovering around 47%, the lowest in his presidency, and the tendency of undecided voters to break against the incumbent Bush has an uphill battle towards re-election.

[clintl]

I read an interesting article over the weekend that made a fairly coherent argument that Bush's campaign strategy of focusing on his base with the gay marriage issue and terror war is the kind of strategy that causes incumbents to lose. Meanwhile, Kerry's strategy of moving to the center and working on the undecideds is the kind of strategy that wins elections. I guess we'll see what happens. It does seem that Kerry and Edwards have adopted an optomism theme which should play well.

I think the Bush opponents and Bush supporters are so entrenched that this is really going to go down to the wire, but Bush is in real trouble if it does.

[cartman]

There is only one poll that counts, and that is still three months away.

Well, not really. These polls being done are nationwide, not broken down by state. Al Gore won the "final poll" in 2000, but it's the electoral votes that make the decision.

I for one am getting a little poll weary. There's going to be 10 a day between now and November. Like it's been said before here, they don't really tell you anything, except for what the poll sponsor was likely looking for.

[clintl]

Another look at how mixed the polls are:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=4&u=/ap/20040802/ap_on_el_pr/presidential_polls_2

[Pyser]

doomed.

[jefflackey]

No matter how you spin it, it's not a good sign for Kerry. Traditionally even eventual losers have gotten a big post-convention boost - heck, Dukakis went up 14 points over Bush-1 right after his convention. With all of the publicity and love given to Edwards by the networks right before the convention (every morning show and news show displayed Edwards and his kids and family, arm in loving arm with the Kerrys) and the favorable coverage of the convention itself, it would be natural to expect a pretty good bump in the polls. I'm pretty surprised at the results myself. Even though I don't hold a lot of belief in polls in general, the normal trend is a good sized bump and it didn't happen. Democrats are worried (I've talked to several who are actively working for Kerry locally.)

[SFL Cat]

Maybe some day, the Democrats will realize that their base is now mostly leftist fringe groups. Maybe after they've been whipped in enough elections and begin to move more toward the center, they'll become a party I feel like I can support again.

[NoMyths]

I think they might have gotten a bigger boost if people had gotten a chance to see more of the convention, rather than have the newscasters and pundits tell them how they should react to it.

[clintl]

Democrats are as close to the center as Republicans are.

[clintl]

I think they might have gotten a bigger boost if people had gotten a chance to see more of the convention, rather than have the newscasters and pundits tell them how they should react to it.

That's true. There was hardly any network coverage this year, and it may simply be a case of the "Convention Bounce" going the way of the .400 hitter.

[NoMyths]

That's true. There was hardly any network coverage this year, and it may simply be a case of the "Convention Bounce" going the way of the .400 hitter.That's my sense of it. Add in the fact that more Americans than ever get their news from the Internet and the polarization of this election and the difference between this and previous years isn't that surprising.

[Swaggs]

Maybe some day, the Democrats will realize that their base is now mostly leftist fringe groups. Maybe after they've been whipped in enough elections and begin to move more toward the center, they'll become a party I feel like I can support again.

That is a silly statement.

The country is almost perfectly split. The last presidential election was the closest ever. The congress is almost 50-50. All the presidential polls have been virtually tied all Summer.

How can you possibly claim that one side is pandering to the extreme more than the other? They are mirror images of one another.

[SFL Cat]

Swaggs, If the election is as close as you say it will be, then you can give me a big I told you so. In the end, I don't think it will be as close as the 2000 election was IMO. You can cry about "stolen" elections all you want, but the fact is, the 2000 election shouldn't have been as close as it was. Don't know if that was more a backlash against Clinton or that Gore was a poor candidate, but personally, I think Kerry is an even worse candidate than Gore was.

Say what you want, but I think the Clinton's still have a lot of control over the Democratic Party, and I don't think Hillary wants to have to wait for 8 years for Kerry, and then potentially another 8 years for Edwards before she runs for Pres.

Howard Dean made some definite gaffes during his primary campaign, but he had the Dems energized like no other candidate, especially the hate-Bush crowd. Another plus the fact that he was a legitimate Washington outsider, unlike Kerry or Edwards. I think the Democratic machine did an effective cutting him off at the knees and getting Herman Munster Kerry (who wasn't even on the scope when the primaries started) suddenly annoited as the front runner.

[clintl]

SFL, his point was that the Democratic Party base is no more a collection of left wing fringe groups than the Republican Party base is a collection of right wing fringe groups. Both parties have their fringe groups, and both parties need them to a certain extent. Both parties have special interest groups they pander to. But the great majority of the people who make up the base of both parties are ordinary Americans with diverse and differing viewpoints.

[Swaggs]

Swaggs, If the election is as close as you say it will be, then you can give me a big I told you so. In the end, I don't think it will be as close as the 2000 election was IMO. You can cry about "stolen" elections all you want, but the fact is, the 2000 election shouldn't have been as close as it was. Don't know if that was more a backlash against Clinton or that Gore was a poor candidate, but personally, I think Kerry is an even worse candidate than Gore was.

Say what you want, but I think the Clinton's still have a lot of control over the Democratic Party, and I don't think Hillary wants to have to wait for 8 years for Kerry, and then potentially another 8 years for Edwards before she runs for Pres.

Howard Dean made some definite gaffes during his primary campaign, but he had the Dems energized like no other candidate, especially the hate-Bush crowd. Another plus the fact that he was a legitimate Washington outsider, unlike Kerry or Edwards. I think the Democratic machine did an effective cutting him off at the knees and getting Herman Munster Kerry (who wasn't even on the scope when the primaries started) suddenly annoited as the front runner.

I didn't say anything about the upcoming election, and you saying that it won't be as close as the 2000 election is the safe bet of the century.

I think what you need to consider is that 80% of the country is probably already absolutely certain of who they are going to vote for (you and I probably fall into this group) and about 10% are reasonably certain of who they are voting for. Right now, it looks like it is about 45% to 45%, give or take a few points on each side on any given day. Barring a major October suprise, I really don't see one side pulling away, other than fortifying that undecided vote.

I'm not sure I follow you on the Dean entry.

[Pumpy Tudors]

I'm not into politics at all, so this question may seem "newbie," but are people's votes really influenced by these conventions? From what I've seen of conventions over my lifetime, they just seem like big wet blowjobs to me. What exactly does the public learn from the conventions? I'm not trying to be an ass. I'm just curious.

[Vegas Vic]

Right now, it looks like it is about 45% to 45%, give or take a few points on each side on any given day. Barring a major October suprise, I really don't see one side pulling away, other than fortifying that undecided vote.

In order get re-elected, Bush needs to open up a 4 or 5 point lead after Labor Day and sustain it going into the election. Historically, the undecided voters break 2 to 1 for the challenger.

http://members.cox.net/brettclark2/enron2.gif

[nfg22]

I'm not into politics at all, so this question may seem "newbie," but are people's votes really influenced by these conventions? From what I've seen of conventions over my lifetime, they just seem like big wet blowjobs to me. What exactly does the public learn from the conventions? I'm not trying to be an ass. I'm just curious.


Its usually when you state your platform and your stances before the debates....now in my opinion the Kerry/Edwards team just said how much of a liar Bush is and then talked about how they are gunna turn the country around. They never explained how they would though....I think Kerry could have had this election in the bag if he would have just had a platform...

[rkmsuf]

It's hard to have much of any influence when you talk about giving a hampster mouth to mouth.

[Jesse_Ewiak]

Two quicks hits...both from left-ish sites, but it's just numbers....

From mydd.com



Post-Convention, Registered Voter, Two-Way Trial Heats Thus Far
by Chris Bowers

Ruy Teixeira has definitely won me over when it comes to determining the most accurate most important trial heat models. For me, it is all about the two-way, registered voter trial heats:

ABC
940 RV, 7/30-8/1, MoE 3 (7/22-25 results)
Kerry 52 (48)
Bush 45 (49)

ARG
776 RV, 7/30-8/1, MoE 3.5 (7/1-7/3 results)
Kerry 49 (49)
Bush 46 (45)

CBS
991 RV, 7/30-8/1, MoE 3 (7/11-7/15 results)
Kerry 49 (49)
Bush 43 (44)

CNN
1,366 RV, 7/30-8/1, MoE 3 (7/19-7/21 results)
Kerry 48 (49)
Bush 48 (45)

Newsweek
1,010 RV, 7/29-7/30, MoE 3 (7/8-7/9 results)
Kerry 52 (51)
Bush 44 (45)

With the exception of ABC news, it would appear that so far there has been no real bounce. But hey, so what? Kerry's still in a pretty damn good position, especially when you consider all of the discussion here over the weekend about how undecideds break in elections with incumbents. Kerry's lowest score is 49, and Bush's highest is 47. Numbers like these on Election Day would almost certainly spell Bush's doom. While I would like to see Kerry up by another three or four points, I'm still pretty happy when I look at these numbers.



So, throwing out the highest and lowest means a 5.2% lead for Kerry. Close sure, but no one's said this is going to be a blowout.

From emergingdemocraticmajorityweblog.com, numbers are from the Galup poll by the way.


Also, just to deepen the mystery, other results from the Gallup poll suggest a good bounce for Kerry in almost all other respects. Compared to their pre-convention poll, Bush's approval rating went down and his disapproval rating went up. By 57-39, the public now agrees that Kerry "has the personality and leadership qualities a president should have" (up from 53/41) and by 52-43, the public now says they agree with Kerry on the issues that matter most to them (up from 49-42).

On who can best handle specific issues, Kerry's lead on the economy has gone from 8 to 11 points; on Iraq, he has gone from -5 to +2; on terrorism, from -18 to -12; on health care from +17 to +21; and on taxes from +2 to +3. Kerry has also regained the lead over Bush on who can manage the government effectively (+1); increased his lead from +8 to +15 on "cares about people like you"; reduced his deficit from -19 to -9 on who is a strong and decisive leader; took the lead over Bush on "is a person you admire" (+2); increased his lead on having an optimistic vision for the future from +3 to +11; took the lead over Bush on being honest and trustworthy (+5); and registered a large lead on "will unite the country, not divide it" (+13).

And how about this one: Kerry is now preferred over Bush, 51-46, as the candidate the public trusts more to handle the responsibilities of commander-in-chief of the military. And he has a higher net rating than Bush on being capable (or not) of handling the commander-in-chief resonsibilities (+30 vs. +21).

Heck, Kerry even went up on having a clear plan for handling the situation in Iraq, so that his net rating on having a plan (-14) is now actually a little bit better than Bush's (-16). Before the convention, Bush's net rating on this issue (-9) was a great deal better than Kerry's (-23).

But, somehow, all this didn't affect the horse race much. Hard to figure out. It must have been a very strange Saturday.

Well, we'll see what the other polls have to say. And Gallup apparently is going to stay in the field for a third night (Sunday night), so we'll see what happens with that. In the meantime, bounce or not, Kerry still seems to have helped his general political position by the convention which, as I've argued here a number of times, is the really important thing.

[Fritz]

initial post unedited by popular demand

[sachmo71]

beware of your father

(unedited by popular demand)

Still missing it. :(