PDA

View Full Version : Newsweek Poll Shows Debate hurt Bush


Kaylore
10-02-2004, 02:31 PM
Here's The Article (http://www.drudgereport.com/flash1nw.htm)

And Here's the Story:

Drudge Report

NEWSWEEK POLL: BUSH LEAD GONE
Sat Oct 02 2004 16:42:32 ET

New York-Sixty-one percent of Americans who watched the first presidential debate on September 30 say Sen. John Kerry won; 19 percent say President George W. Bush won and 16 percent say they tied, according to the latest Newsweek Poll which was conducted after the debate ended. Fifty-six percent say Kerry did better than they expected; 11 percent say so for Bush. Thirty-eight percent say Bush did worse than expected; 3 percent say so for Kerry, the poll shows.

The debate erased the lead the Bush/Cheney ticket has held over Kerry/Edwards in the Newsweek Poll since the Republican convention. In a three-way trial heat including Ralph Nader/Peter Camejo, among registered voters Kerry/Edwards leads Bush/Cheney 47 percent v. 45 percent with 2 percent for Nader/Camejo. In a two-way heat, Kerry/Edwards leads 49 percent v. 46 percent for Bush/Cheney, the poll shows.

A 62-percent majority of viewers says Kerry seemed more confident and self-assured (26% say so for Bush) and 51 percent say Kerry had better command of issues and facts (37% for Bush). Forty-seven percent say Kerry seemed more personally likeable (41 % for Bush) and 49 percent say Kerry came closer to reflecting their own views on most foreign policy issues (43% for Bush). The two were nearly even on several other points, including who came across as a strong leader (47% Kerry, 44% Bush) and who had a better plan for dealing with the situation in Iraq (45% for both). Forty percent of viewers thought Kerry was too wordy and 57 percent thought Bush was too repetitive.

Fifty-seven percent of all poll respondents say they are dissatisfied with the way things are going in the United States at this time. Bush's job approval rating dropped two points from the Sept. 9-10 Newsweek Poll to 46 percent-a 6-point drop since the poll taken during and after the Republican convention. Forty-eight percent of registred voters polled say they would not like to see Bush re-elected but almost as many (46%) say they would.

Among registered voters, 60 percent say they know "a lot" about what Bush stands for, compared to 38 percent who say so about Kerry, the poll shows.

During the debate, President Bush said the military would remain "an all-volunteer army," but if Bush is re-elected, 38 percent of registered voters say the draft is likely to be reinstated; 51 percent say it's not, according to the poll. If Kerry is elected president, 18 percent say the draft is likely to be reinstated; 67 percent say it is not. And 62 percent of registered voters say reinstating the draft should not be considered at this time; 28 percent say it should be considered.

A 60-percent majority of registered voters say Bush administration policies and diplomatic efforts have led to more anti-Americanism around the world and 51 percent say the administration has not done enough to involve major allies and international organizations in trying to achieve its foreign policy goals, the poll shows.

As for who will handle issues better overall, among registered voters Bush leads Kerry 52 to 40 percent on terrorism and homeland security; the situation in Iraq (49% vs. 44%); the situation involving Israel and the Palestinians (46% vs. 39%) and controlling the spread of nuclear weapons (47% v. 43%). Kerry scores better on the economy (52% vs. 39%); health care, including Medicare (56% to 34%) and American jobs and foreign competition (54% vs. 36%), the poll shows.

Overall, 62 percent say Bush has strong leadership qualities (compared to 56% who say so for Kerry). Sixty-six percent say Bush says what he believes, not just what people want to hear, compared to 48 percent for Kerry. Sixty-five percent say Bush is personally likeable (63% say so for Kerry). But more registered voters (57%) say Kerry is honest and ethical (vs. 55% for Bush); the same amount (51%) says they would trust Kerry to make the right decisions during an international crisis as would trust Bush (51%); and more (57%) say Kerry cares about people like them (vs. 49% for Bush). And 80 percent of registered voters say Kerry is intelligent and well informed, compared to 59 percent for Bush.

On Iraq, 50 percent of registered voters polled say the war in Iraq was not necessary; 46 percent say it was. And 55 percent of registered voters say going to war in Iraq has not made Americans safer from terrorism; 41 percent say it has. Fifty-one percent of registered voters say the Bush administration misinterpreted or misanalyzed the intelligence reports it said indicated Iraq had banned weapons; 41 percent say it didn't. And 45 percent say the administration purposely misled the public about evidence that Iraq had banned weapons in order to build support for the war; 50 percent say it did not.

During is 19-year career in the U.S. Senate, Kerry has changed his position on a number of issues. From what they know about Kerry, 47 percent of registered voters say this is because Kerry is thoughtful and changes position as circumstances change or he learns more about an issue; the same number (47%) say it's because Kerry is politically-motivated and changes his position when he thinks it will improve his image or help him win an election.

For this Newsweek Poll, Princeton Survey Research Associates International interviewed 1,013 registered voters on Sept. 30-Oct. 2, 2004.

END

Looks like a small majority saw the debate as a win for Kerry. There's one left, so it will be interesting to see how both candidates fare after regrouping. This is the first poll out and it's Newsweek, so we won't know for sure where people are at until monday or tuesday.

Hercules Rockefeller
10-02-2004, 02:43 PM
Whoa, Drudge and Newsweek for this report? I believe the Lefties here have said that Drudge is a muckracker and worthless, and after Newsweek's poll after the RNC, its polls can't be trusted. This is though an RV sample, I'm curious what the LV poll looked like.

In other polls, Democratic polling firm Democracy Corps had a +2 bounce for Kerry putting it to 50-48 Bush.

Rasmussen's Daily Tracking poll had 6% of their voters change their mind after the debate, 3% are now for Kerry, 2% now for Bush, and 1% now undecided. Their's is now 48.6-45.6 Bush, but only a third of that poll took place after the debate.

Kaylore
10-02-2004, 02:48 PM
Whoa, Drudge and Newsweek for this report? I believe the Lefties here have said that Drudge is a muckracker and worthless, and after Newsweek's poll after the RNC, its polls can't be trusted.

Part of my evil plot. If they discount the source it means admitting the news is false. Mwa ha ha! you either accept Drudge or deny Kerry!

Seriously though, debates don't have nearly the residual effect of othe events until after the last one. This could still go either way, but Kerry is the more polished debater. Bush was running around in Florida checking the hurricane damage all that morning, so fatigue was an issue but I'm not sure that a rested Bush would have done too much better. I guess we'll know for round two.

Spider
10-02-2004, 03:10 PM
I still maintain , polls dont mean much , Some things from the debate will be remembered alot wont ,People are just riding high on Emotion , Now if the next 2 debates go like this one did , then Bush should be worried ......


Hey isnt Drudge the same one that put out Kerry had an affair ?

Spider
10-02-2004, 03:13 PM
Seriously though, debates don't have nearly the residual effect of othe events until after the last one. This could still go either way, but Kerry is the more polished debater. Bush was running around in Florida checking the hurricane damage all that morning, so fatigue was an issue but I'm not sure that a rested Bush would have done too much better. I guess we'll know for round two.
Thats an excuse , What I think most people thought is , Why cant he give us 90 minutes of his time to tell us Where he is leading this country ?
But I do agree about round 2 , Bush is going to have to take this serious , and match Kerry blow for blow

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-02-2004, 03:19 PM
America got to see the real bush.

It's really that simple.

People are used to seeing the frat boy in situations where he speaks to hand-picked, loyalty oath-signing audiences of adoring supporters or to bullied members of the WH press corp. (No Helen Thomas' allowed.)

For the first time Thursday night, people the world over saw the boy king in a situation where he actually had to respond to someone who was confronting him with real questions, real facts, and without kid gloves. It was a rare moment when bush was actually taken to task and held accountable for his actions.

Bush looked like a teenager who was being called on the carpet by the grown-ups for wrecking the family Oldsmobile.

The frustrated, petulant, anxious, timid, weak, bumbling little man you saw at the podium is the real bush.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-02-2004, 03:24 PM
But I do agree about round 2 , Bush is going to have to take this serious , and match Kerry blow for blow

The first debate was the one bush was supposed to win since his alleged "strengths" are supposed to lie in the area of foreign policy, the "war on terror," etc.

Can you imaging what he going to look like when he has to defend his record on domestic policy? :D

baja
10-02-2004, 03:31 PM
As much as I would like it to transpire I don't think Bush will look that bad again, his handlers will see to that.

Boy did he come across pathetic.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-02-2004, 03:39 PM
Bush is weakest on domestic issues.

No amount of practicing 15-second soundbites written on flash cards with Karl Rove will save him from another thrashing by Kerry.

baja
10-02-2004, 04:01 PM
Bush is weakest on domestic issues.

No amount of practicing 15-second soundbites written on flash cards with Karl Rove will save him from another thrashing by Kerry.


True but I think they will drill into him, George, no more nana, nana, nana, you flip flopped and for sure no more of the pathetic, repetitive you can't be a commander in chief unless you are tough like me stuff.

Bush would have come off better if he just tried to look dignified and said nothing.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-02-2004, 04:03 PM
I'm wondering if bush will try to find a way to weasel out of the next two debates altogether.

baja
10-02-2004, 04:06 PM
I'm wondering if bush will try to find a way to weasel out of the next two debates altogether.

That would be his best move - "I'd love to debate but I got to meet with my world leaders alot now."

"It's hard work running the world ya know besides God has been talking to me alot these days, seems he's got problems that need fixing too."

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-02-2004, 04:21 PM
"It's hard work running the world ya know besides God has been talking to me alot these days, seems he's got problems that need fixing too."

:laugh:

OrangeDoofus
10-02-2004, 04:37 PM
I don't think the debate had that big an effect, but then I'm one of the folks who never believed the huge leads Bush supposedly had coming out of the RNC.

errand
10-02-2004, 09:18 PM
Gotta love polls, when they say your guys is leading their etched in stone, if they say your guy's losing, well, their nothing but biased polls of the representative parties involved.

BTW, did you guys read USA Today the morning after? In it the article stated that earlier in the week, Terry Mcauliffe sent e-mails out to Dems everywhere crying that he belived Gore won the '00 debates, but the media spin afterwards gave the victory to Bush...and that wasn't going to happen again. He then ordered all Dems to -

[] flood the dot.com polls (notice those specific polls heavy lean towards Kerry?)

[] flood their newpaper editorials with "Kerry won debate" letters (read your daily fishwrap lately?)

[] flood the radio talk shows with the same thing (notice the excessive number of libs calling into to conservative shows lately?)

The funny thing is that the networks ran pre-debate polls (Who would you vote for)...showing Bush leading by an average margin of 50-46.....and after debate polls showing Bush again leading by an average of 51-47. So are the polls accurate, or misleading?

On one hand Kerry wins the debate...on the other hand he's still losing to Bush in the poll that matters most.

baja
10-02-2004, 09:20 PM
Sorry, what it that poll that matters most?

rosco
10-03-2004, 07:35 AM
Part of my evil plot. If they discount the source it means admitting the news is false. Mwa ha ha! you either accept Drudge or deny Kerry!

Seriously though, debates don't have nearly the residual effect of othe events until after the last one. This could still go either way, but Kerry is the more polished debater. Bush was running around in Florida checking the hurricane damage all that morning, so fatigue was an issue but I'm not sure that a rested Bush would have done too much better. I guess we'll know for round two.
excuses, excuses everybody has one :nono:

Exile_In_SJ
10-03-2004, 09:40 AM
interesting note obout the newsweek sampling change.
from little green footballs.

Look at the makeup of Republicans vs. Democrats in Newsweek’s poll from September 11, 2004: NEWSWEEK POLL: Campaign 2004.

391 Republicans (plus or minus 6)
300 Democrats (plus or minus 7)
270 Independents (plus or minus 7)


Compare against the same data from the new poll, which Newsweek is using to claim that Bush’s poll lead has “evaporated:” NEWSWEEK POLL: First Presidential Debate.

345 Republicans (plus or minus 6)
364 Democrats (plus or minus 6)
278 Independents (plus or minus 7)


Did Newsweek choose a lower percentage of Republicans for the first debate to set up Kerry’s “comeback,” or did they stack the deck with more Democrats in the second poll?

OrangeDoofus
10-03-2004, 10:40 AM
interesting note obout the newsweek sampling change.
from little green footballs.

Look at the makeup of Republicans vs. Democrats in Newsweek’s poll from September 11, 2004: NEWSWEEK POLL: Campaign 2004.

391 Republicans (plus or minus 6)
300 Democrats (plus or minus 7)
270 Independents (plus or minus 7)


Compare against the same data from the new poll, which Newsweek is using to claim that Bush’s poll lead has “evaporated:” NEWSWEEK POLL: First Presidential Debate.

345 Republicans (plus or minus 6)
364 Democrats (plus or minus 6)
278 Independents (plus or minus 7)


Did Newsweek choose a lower percentage of Republicans for the first debate to set up Kerry’s “comeback,” or did they stack the deck with more Democrats in the second poll?

Yeah, that's pretty much why I didn't put too much faith in a lot of those polls over the last month. Those Gallup polls over the last month showing a huge Bush lead had samples similar to the first Newsweek poll you cite: substantially more Republicans than Democrats. The turnout in the last two presidential elections was something like 39% Democrat, 34% Repulbican, 27% Independent, so it was hard to take those polls seriously when they showed way more Republicans than Democrats in their sample.

CBS did a poll last month that showed a large Bush lead, but when people were asked who they voted for in 2000, the results came back 36% Bush, 28% Gore, which is pretty far off from what really happened.

That's not to say that the polls have necessarily been "cooking the books". There could be legit reasons why they're getting more Republicans than you'd expect. Maybe the likely-voter models these guys use favor Republicans. Maybe Democrats don't answer their phones, or don't even have phones. (I don't have a "real" phone, I live entirely off a cel phone. Since polling companies aren't allowed to call cel phones, nobody's ever going to get me in a phone poll). Maybe after the Republican convention a lot of people said "yeah, that was a good convention, I think I'm a Republican now" for awhile, but now they've gone back to calling themselves Democrats.

But maybe the polls are cheating. Maybe they're flipping samples around to try to make the race seem more dramatic than it is. No way to tell unless we can see the entire process starting from the raw data.

Anyway, the bottom line as far as I'm concerned is that 40% of the voters are going to vote for Bush no matter what, and 40% of the voters are going to vote for Kerry no matter what. That means the only real fight is for the 20% in the middle. Considering that, does anyone really believe that the Republican convention caused a 10-point swing toward Bush, and then the debates caused a 10-point swing back toward Kerry? I don't. I think it's a tight race, I think it's always been tight, and I think any "big swings" have been four or five points at the very most, and probably less than that.

Hercules Rockefeller
10-03-2004, 10:56 AM
It depends on how you see "party ID" when doing these polls. If you see it as a demographic, you hard weight for it to the 2000 numbers (39D, 35R, and 26I), or you can see it as not a big deal because a lot of people seem to see party ID as who they're voting for at the time. So if someone ended up getting called twice (about 0 chance of happening) and was voting for Kerry in August they identified as a D and then was called in Sept. and changed to Bush they identified as an R.

That Newsweek poll could have been a good indicator if they used the same proportion as they had in their 1st RNC poll. The Bush/Kerry numbers might not have been accurate, but it could give an indicator of movement as a result of the debate.

Taco John
10-03-2004, 11:24 AM
I think everybody knows that the Re-elect Bush Repor- er, Drudge Report is fair and balanced...

Hercules Rockefeller
10-03-2004, 11:43 AM
I think everybody knows that the Re-elect Bush Repor- er, Drudge Report is fair and balanced...

Devastating!

OrangeDoofus
10-03-2004, 11:48 AM
It depends on how you see "party ID" when doing these polls. If you see it as a demographic, you hard weight for it to the 2000 numbers (39D, 35R, and 26I), or you can see it as not a big deal because a lot of people seem to see party ID as who they're voting for at the time. So if someone ended up getting called twice (about 0 chance of happening) and was voting for Kerry in August they identified as a D and then was called in Sept. and changed to Bush they identified as an R.

Yeah, that's the real question. It would be nice to see the absolute raw numbers before they do any kind of weighing. Then we could see if people really are switching party ID, or if the pollsters are just weighting differently in different polls (whether deliberately or not).

Hercules Rockefeller
10-03-2004, 11:56 AM
Rasmussen (who hard weights for ID)

Date Bush Kerry
Today 49.0 45.4
Oct 2 48.6 45.6
Oct 1 48.7 45.3

2/3 of this sample (I'm pretty sure it is 500 per day) that results in today's numbers, were done after the debate. The Oct. 1 phone calls were done before the debate.

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

SoCalBronco
10-03-2004, 12:07 PM
good point herc. This is the thing, Kerry got a bounce from this debate but by Rasmussen's polling it doesnt appear to have lasted. It is 49-45 today with, as you noted slightly more than 2/3 of the respondents being polled after the debate. At this point, even this poll is irrelevant. We need to see whether 1) there is any bounce for Kerry in battleground states and 2) whether that bounce disappates or not in the next few days (or has already dissapated).