National Poll: Kerry slips 8 (in 1st), Edwards up 7 (in 2d) in last 3 days

[AP]

Kerry  Slips, Edwards Gains, Dean Hangs On
Kerry 43% Edwards 25% Dean 13% 
 
National Democrats

Kerry 43%
Edwards 25%
Dean 13%
Sharpton 4%
Kucinich 2%
Not Sure 13%

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Democrats_Ballot_Preference_2004.htm

February 17, 2004--For the first time since winning in Iowa, Massachusetts Senator John Kerry has seen his national poll numbers slip. The latest Rasmussen Reports national tracking poll shows that Kerry now attracts support from 43% of the nation's Democrats, down from 51% three days ago.

North Carolina Senator John Edwards is a distant second but gaining. The North Carolina Senator now attracts support from 25% of the nation's Democrats, up from 18% three days ago.

[citizen snips]

1. When is the primary?

n/t

[Freddie Stubbs]

2. So, in other words, Edwards is a distant second

[AP]

3. In other words, he closed 15 pts in 3 days, and he's only 18 back now.

[AP]

5. In other words, Clark leaving perhaps got people to focus on Ed v Ke

and people are liking Edwards.

Maybe if Dean leaves after today, more people will start making this comparison, and Edwards will do even better.

[lancdem]

7. CBS poll still has Kerry way ahead, 53 to 8

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04dem.htm

As feistydem says, I'm more concerned with the presidential tracking poll.

[AP]

8. Three day 15 point swing in gap b/w Kerry and Edwards.

18 to go.

[lancdem]

13. Kerry will get a boost after winning Wis. tonight

Plus, those numbers may have reflected some nervousness by Dems because that tracking poll was largely done before the intern story was debunked. I like Edwards, but I wouldn't read too much into one poll unless it's backed by others.

[AP]

14. He's won everything else so far, and Edwards is still closing.

[lancdem]

20. Hey, if you want to believe a Republican tracking poll

that shows a trend no one else is showing, be my guest.

[AP]

24. Yeah, a republican poll that's overestimating Edwards's support.

It's measuring a trend.

[lancdem]

29. A "trend" no other poll seems to be picking up

Hmmm...

[AP]

35. What other national polls are measuring trend over last three days?

[flpoljunkie]

32. U of Conn latest poll has Kerry 64%, Edwards 16%, Dean 8%. Rasmussen not

listed on pollingreport.

University of Connecticut polled 474 Registered Voters 2/12-16 with MOE +/- 4.5.

[AP]

36. What was their three day trend?

[Freddie Stubbs]

12. Im sure that Edwards will get an even bigger bump if he finishes 3rd in WI

[AP]

17. He didn't even come in third in the last two, and he's still closing.

[Freddie Stubbs]

22. There are less candidates to compete against

Third place in essentially last place, as there are only three serious candidates in the race.

[lancdem]

23. Whatever

[feistydem]

4. ...and Dean an even greater distant third.

Kerry is still beating Bush, though --and that's all I really care about.

[XanaDUer]

6. Whoa, Edwards now in front of Dean?

Interesting.

[King of New Orleans]

9. Probably the effect

of the fake scandal. Though I can't get the website to load so I can't look at the numbers.

[w4rma]

11. Or Edwards's stance against free trade. (n/t)

[King of New Orleans]

Yes, the internet and radio

was filled with discussion of free trade over the last three days.

Look, I like Edwards and I've become more anti-NAFTA, but the fact is the only thing that could have impacted a national tracking poll over that period is the whole fake scandal story.

[jeter]

10. Just for the record...

Rasmussen polls are always wrong. This may be true.

But Rassmussen had Bush beating Gore by 12% in 2000 just one day before the election.

I think it is a Republican poll. They seem to materialize around election time.

[lancdem]

15. I was wondering that

I thought the name Rasmussen sounded familiar.

[West Coast Democrat]

16. I was just going to mention this as well

Rasmussen polls were touted by NewsMax and other conservative outlets during election 2000.

[AP]

18. Got a cite?

[jeter]

26. I don't have a link...

...only my memories.

I remember when Gore surged after the 2000 Dem convention and took over the lead from Bush for most of September into October. Rassmussen still had Bush leading.

I remember John Fund on CNN one night. Saying he didn't believe Gallup, CBS, Newsweek, ABC/Washington Post, etc. Because Rassmussen had Bush ahead.

I remember thinking that this poll (whose methodology is usually off as well - they telephone people using automated phone service and people have to 'hit one if you support Kerry, etc) was just crap in 2000.

Then it disappeared. Throughout the Bush Presidency I never saw one mention of the poll. Then alas, election 2004 comes around and here is Rassmussen again.

I just find it suspicious.

[59millionmorons]

48. PORTRAITOFAMERICA.COM

After the election he apologized on his wbesite for being so wrong and promised to change his method of polling, but from what I see he is still using the same method. Portraitofamerica.com site was soon after shut down.

[West Coast Democrat]

30. Here are some links

http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/9/19/183551

Here is another article here, mentioning that Scott Rasmussen wrote a book called "The GOP Generation."

http://conwebwatch.tripod.com/stories/2003/wndpolls.html

[monchie]

19. Rasmussen is either a very incompetent polling organization...

...or they're part of the GOP Propaganda Machine. During the 2000 Election, they were always way off, often by 10-20 points, compared to other polls--and always way off in favor of Shrub.

[AP]

21. cite?

[lancdem]

27. Try a Google search

These posters are correct about Rasmussen.

[King of New Orleans]

28. Is there any reason on your part

to think that the polling change isn't due to the fake scandal? It's a national poll, it's not like people all across the nation were closely watching everything in Wisconsin and suddenly said "I like the cut of that man's jib" and moved towards Edwards.

I do think the fake scandal did cause some movement to Edwards, but unless he gets a big surprise in Wisconsin, another loss and the collapse of the phony scandal, it's going to bounce back the other way.

[spooky3]

43. that's certainly possible but what's really hard to explain

is why, for months, those polled (at the pollingreport site) had Kerry in single digits, and then suddenly, last month, he went to 45-50%. He obviously didn't change, and he's well known nationally. So just as you have difficulty believing that the shift for Edwards is meaningful, I am not sure how to interpret the incredible bounce for Kerry.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[monchie]

34. I'm just relying on my memories...

I run a political discussion channel on IRC, and during the 2000 election people were constantly quoting polls that backed up their views. A lot of the more naive or dishonest Republicans on the channel quoted Rasmussen religiously because it showed exactly what they wanted to hear.

There was a CNN tracking poll that was a bit of an outlier as well...I think it was CNN/Gallup, IIRC. They were a bit shaky early on, with several wild day-to-day swings, which tended to make me a bit suspicious; they got steadier the closer it got to Election Day, though they were still about 3-5 points off the eventual results, IIRC.

Zogby was the poll I trusted the most. Very few wild swings in its tracking poll, and the other polls seemed to confirm their results, especially if you paid attention to the fine print (registered vs. likely voters, voters who were leaning toward a candidate, etc.). IIRC, Zogby was the only pollster who had Gore ahead, with a tiny margin, in the popular vote the day before the election.

[monchie]

One more thing...

You rarely hear of Rasmussen outside of presidential election years, which also sets off my BS detector.

[59millionmorons]

50. It was the portraitofamericam.com poll

Poll was shut down soon after the election.

[59millionmorons]

47. Your correct (portraitofamericapoll.com)

This poll had Bush way up in 2000 and had Bush with 390 electoral votes. He is the worst pollster out there. He uses telephone calls to adults.

[Kahuna]

25. The GOP smear machine is hi-fiving at this news...

Seems their lies about Kerry/intern has had an affect. Too too bad.

[lancdem]

33. Don't worry, Kahuna

This is a GOP tracking poll that shows something no other poll is showing. Besides, the intern thing is over now, so any effect would be short-lived. BTW, if a GOP tracking poll shows Kerry leading Bush by 1 point, imagine what nonpartisan polls must show.

[Kahuna]

39. You're so right. Thanks for the reminder...

No offense to other candidate supporters, but I hope Kerry blows it away in Wisconsin. That'll serve 'em right. }(

[AP]

38. Why would they celebrate Edwards closing on Kerry?

[DancingBear]

41. Just a hunch here

But maybe they'd like to run against someone wth NO foreign policy experience, NO military credentials to negate Cimpy's war, and, oh yes - a trial lawyer?

Again, just a hunch.

[AP]

44. Trust me, they don't want to run against someone who took down Helms

in a blue state.

They tried all that before, and it didn't work.

As for running on national security, they're more afraid of running against Edwards who will remind people of what issues really matter. Didn't you hear in the debate in WI? People list Iraq at the bottom of their list of important issues, and jobs and the economy at the top.

If we run Kerry, you abandon the economy and jobs, and you run on Iraq. That's not going to win the election.

[DancingBear]

46. Valid points - if the election were held today

However, Georgie Boy has 200 large ones that he will use to DEFINE the election in terms of the war. Listening to what primary Democrats view as important is living in a fools paradise - while I commend Edwards for being smart enough to successfully craft a primary message that message can't be the be all and end all for a GE campaign. He will get killed due to his lack of national security "gravitas."

Re: Kerry - I have my doubts about him, for I know him well from years of living just across the border from MA. However, he is (in my mind) the stronger of the two candidates, as I feel that any of the candidates can make the case for the economy and jobs. Plus, if he partners with Clark then Wes can eat * and Cheney alive re: national security, chickenhawks, et al.

As I've said many times, Edwards will make a fine candidate - in 8 years.

If Wes ain't running, natch. :)

[adamrsilva]

37. New poll at CBS just had Kerry

at 53%

[spooky3]

40. do you have a link please?

[spooky3]

42. good work, JRE, keep it up!

[Sensitivity]

45. Shows that Smear Tactics work even if based on nothing. Rove knew

what he was doing.

[Snivi Yllom]

49. hmmmm electability maybe aint the top issue any more

How interesting things are becoming.
;)

[59millionmorons]

51. I don't mean to burst your bubble

But read some of the post above about Rasmussen failures in the 2000 election. A short clue, he had Bush beating Gore with 390 electoral votes and by 12 percentage points. He has a flawed method of polling. He calls about 1500 people a night by telephone in which you answer by pushing numbers on your telephone. This method has been proven unreliable.

[AP]

52. But it can measure trends.

[59millionmorons]

53. OK if it makes you feel better

I can only give you the info, it is up to you to read into it.

[Leilani]

54. FOX News loves Rasmussen

They are part of the Faux, Drudge, Rush, Wash Times propaganda
axis of evil.