Yet another couple of data points to support the supposition that Strategic Vision is not a legitimate polling operation, but part of the Republican spin machine, attempting wherever possible to make Kerry look weaker than he is, even in his stronghold states. Look at these recent polls:
WASHINGTON KERRY BUSH NADER MOE
Strategic Vision 9/20 - 9/22 46 45 2 3 (Kerry by 1)
Survey USA 9/19 - 9/21 51 46 - 4 (Kerry by 5)
Ipsos Pub. Aff. 9/17 - 9/20 51 42 2 4.9 (Kerry by 9)
Elway Poll 9/17 - 9/19 52 38 - 5 (Kerry by 14)
CALIFORNIA KERRY BUSH NADER MOE
Strategic Vision 9/20 - 9/22 48 43 - 3 (Kerry by 5)
Los Angeles Times 9/17 - 9/21 53 40 2 3 (Kerry by 13)
Pub. Policy Inst 9/12 - 9/19 51 39 - 3 (Kerry by 12
I think, as I've expressed before, that what you see is a deliberate attempt to undermine Kerry's public position by shaving off points from his poll results wherever and whenever possible -- always being careful never to go too far and present results that no one will believe. The margin of error gives a fair amount of wiggle room for these guys to play within, and I think they're using it for all it's worth.
It would really be best if people dropped SV's results from their poll-driven Electoral College estimations, because they're not trustworthy, in my humble opinion.
For more, see this anlysis and the further links in that post.
Update (9/28): In an e-mail to me, TruthIsAll had some interesting things to say:
I have been posting on just this topic at DU [Democratic Underground].
On the national level, to distinguish between National pollsters, I have created a separate group of 8 Independent pollsters, who are part of the existing full group of 18 corporate and independents.
Is it just a coincidence that the Independent 8 National Group has the race tied at 46%, whereas the full 18 Group has Bush leading by 2%? This means the corporates have Bush leading by an average of 4%.
The effect on the probability of a Kerry win (defined as the probability of getting a majority of the popular vote) based on these two National polling groups is very interesting.
In an unbelievable coincidence, they are exactly reversed as of today.
For the 8 independents: Kerry has a 92.38% win probability.
For the full group of 18, Bush has a 92.38% win probability.
The State model, based on Monte Carlo Simulation, gives Kerry a 91% probability. So the State model confirms the Independents National model.
The numbers are quite interesting:
Kerry current poll weighted average is 46.49%, projected to 50.85% with a win probability of 91.0%.
National 8 model:
Kerry current poll average is 46%, projected to 50.80%, with a win probability of 92.38%.
This is a key point: Both models use totally different methods to compute probabilities and derive Kerry's national popular forecast.
The National model applies the tight MoE for the 8 polls (8,000 respondents) to the projected Kerry % to derive his probability.
The State model uses the results of 5000 simulations based on the latest weighted state polls (mostly Zogby and ARG) to calculate the probability (the number of Kerry wins divided by 5000).
The race is tied if one looks at the current national 8 average poll and the weighted state polls.
But it's NOT really tied, since Kerry will get the bulk of the remaining undecided and other 3rd party voters, not to mention the effects of the unknowable and potentially massive democratic turnout.
I wish I had more time to catch up on what's been going on before lighting out for the territories again, but I'm afraid it's can't be helped. Responsibility calls, and I've got to run. Rumor has it there's Internet access available at the local library where I'm going, so maybe (maybe), I might be able to post something this week -- assuming I'm not so blissed out by living in the beautiful Catskill countryside, and so completely media-deprived as well, that I have nothing whatsoever to say.
And, by the way, don't worry so much about Bush's lead in the Electoral College survey, I'm with Jerome Armstrong in thinking that this is Bush's highwater mark, and, for him, it's all downhill from here. You can already see the signs in the latest state polls, which are moving back Kerry's way and shifting the states which gave Bush his big leads on many sites away from him. My short-term prediction is that next week we'll be back to even, or close to it, and the weeks after that will see Kerry's numbers rise again.
So keep the faith, and keep plugging away, doing whatever you can to support Kerry, get out the vote, and relieve us from the weight and dread of Bush. Negativity and panic aren't helpful or even appropriate, not when you consider the lessons of the past and how quickly things can turn around in an election. Yes, it's certainly true that it's time for the closer to close, and I'm sure Kerry knows that as well, so we can all look forward to the new energy and drive that the Kerry campaign will show us in the coming weeks.
Update (9/25): On a rare occasion when I've been able to get online, let me pop in to say that the site hit 40,000 visits sometime in the past few days (probably on Thursday), and to thank everyone for dropping by.
I returned from the boondocks (very lovely boondocks indeed, near the Catskill Mountains in upstate NY, but anyplace without fast Internet access is a drag by definition if you're trying to keep up with something like a fast-moving election) to my home in NYC only to find that my last survey of Electoral College tracking / prediction / projection / forecast / scoreboard / map sites has passed its sell-by date, so I went to the well once again to see what that trackers are saying.
Larry Allen (9/17) Kerry 222 - Bush 279 - ?? 37 (CO, NV, PA) (was: 254-233-51)
(Note: Provoked by the 9/20 Zogby results, my own numbers have changed to 291-247 -- due to WI & PA flipping from Bush to Kerry -- but I have not included this in the totals below. Next week's survey will reflect any changes that come about due to the Zogby results, and other new poll results.)
Matthew Hubbard (9/18): Kerry 222 - Bush 280 - ?? 36 (CO, FL) (was: 259-243-36)
Human Events (9/17 - news report): Kerry 211 - Bush 327 (new to survey)
LA Times (9/20): Kerry 146 - Bush 180 - ?? 212 (was: 146-168-224)
Leip Atlas (500 "most recent" user predictions; 9/19):
MEDIAN: Kerry 221 - Bush 291 (remainder: 26) (was: 254-259-25)
MODE: Kerry 254 - Bush 284 (was: 254-233-51)
"Mean" is what we usually call "average." All items are added up and divided by the number of items.
"Median" is the center point, the middle value in a list. There are as many values larger than the median as there are values that are smaller.
"Mode" is the number in a list which appears the most times.
RANGE Kerry max: 297 (311) Kerry min: 146 (146)
Bush max: 341 (316) Bush min: 180 (166)
If the results of last week's survey were somewhat difficult to interpret, this week is entirely different, and the results are abundantly clear. Bush has overtaken Kerry, and now sits just about where Kerry was a month ago. The trackers are practically unanimous in declaring Bush as having enough electoral votes to win: 40 of 47 sites have him winning, with another 4 showing him in the lead; on the other hand, only two sites have Kerry winning (one of them is Zogby/WSJ), and one other shows a Kerry lead.
At the moment, Bush has 291 to 293 votes, while Kerry has 221 to 224.
Since I'm spending the bulk of the week in a place with poor Internet access, I really can't update the survey as I usually do in the days after I post it. I'll do what I can on Monday night and Tuesday morning to make sure everything is up to date -- including the latest Rasmussen and Zogby numbers (note: which I have now done) -- but any updates after that will have to wait until the next iteration a week from now.
Due to a complete oversight on my part, in the first couple of publications of this post I forgot to include a new site, the proprietor of which is Alcon San Croix, who describes himself in this way: "I am a 14-year-old student from Tacoma, Washington. I am a progressive Democrat, although certainly not a partisan hack." I have now included his site, with my apologies for the unintended slight.
Although I have included a note to my own projection to indicate how it has changed as a result of the new Zogby numbers, I haven't included the new numbers in the totals, nor do I intend to update all the sites to reflect any changes provoked by Zogby. We will see what those changes are in the next survey, which I should be able to do in one week, on Sunday 9/26 - Monday 9/27.
From each website I've taken the most comprehensive set of numbers offered, if possible without a "toss-up" category or other caveats, just Kerry versus Bush. Many of them differentiate between "solid" or "strong", "slightly" or "weak", and "leaning" or "barely" states, but I've combined them all together in order to present numbers which are as comparable as possible.
I encourage everyone to use the links and check each site for the specifics of that site's methodology and presentation.
My convention is that Kerry is listed first and Bush second, bold type indicates a winning candidate (i.e. 270 electoral votes or more), and italics or underlining indicates a leading candidate.
Sites which haven't updated in a while will be temporarily removed from the list until they're freshened. Right now, until around the end of September, I'll keep a "stagnant" site in the survey for about 3 weeks. For the first half of October that will tighten up to 2 weeks. From the middle of October until the election, it'll be a week at most.
One-time Electoral College analysis articles from the news media (as opposed to ongoing features) will be included, but only for a single interation of the survey, unless they are replaced by a new article.
As always, if anyone has links for any other sites that regularly track Electoral College status, please feel free to send them my way and I'll be glad to add them to the list. I'm also more than happy to hear from the proprietors of any of the sites surveyed here, should they have any complaints, comments, or suggestions for improvements.
The following sites have been removed for the reasons indicated:
hostile to science
lacking in empathy
lacking in public spirit
out of control
Thanks to: Breeze, Chuck, Ivan Raikov, Kaiju, Kathy, Roger, Shirley, S.M. Dixon
i've got a little list...
Steven Abrams (Kansas BofE)
Howard Fieldstead Ahmanson
Roger Ailes (FNC)
Alan Bonsell (Dover BofE)
Bill Buckingham (Dover BofE)
George W. Bush
Bruce Chapman (DI)
The Coors Family
William A. Dembski
Leonard Downie (WaPo)
John Gibson (FNC)
Fred Hiatt (WaPo)
James F. Inhofe
Philip E. Johnson
by Joel Pelletier
(click on image for more info)
Stephen C. Meyer (DI)
Judith Miller (ex-NYT)
Sun Myung Moon
Elspeth Reeve (TNR)
Martin Peretz (TNR)
Richard Mellon Scaife
Susan Schmidt (WaPo)
John Solomon (WaPo)
Richard Thompson (TMLC)
Bob Woodward (WaPo)
All the fine sites I've
Be sure to visit them all!!
Arthur C. Clarke
Daniel C. Dennett
Philip K. Dick
Stephen Jay Gould
"The Harder They Come"
Ursula K. LeGuin
The Marx Brothers
Michael C. Penta
Michael Powell & Emeric Pressburger
"The Red Shoes"
"Singin' in the Rain"
Talking Heads/David Byrne
Hunter S. Thompson
"2001: A Space Odyssey"
If you read unfutz at least once a week, without fail, your teeth will be whiter and your love life more satisfying.
If you read it daily, I will come to your house, kiss you on the forehead, bathe your feet, and cook pancakes for you, with yummy syrup and everything.
(You might want to keep a watch on me, though, just to avoid the syrup ending up on your feet and the pancakes on your forehead.)
Finally, on a more mundane level, since I don't believe that anyone actually reads this stuff, I make this offer: I'll give five bucks to the first person who contacts me and asks for it -- and, believe me, right now five bucks might as well be five hundred, so this is no trivial offer.