LA Times: Kerry Leads Nationwide by Three (Kerry, 47; Bush, 44; Nader, 5)

[mobuto]

What's fascinating is that the margin is the same regardless of whether Nader's included - Nader wins votes only from undecideds.
----


The Los Angeles Times Poll. March 27-30, 2004. N=1,415 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 3.

"If the November general election for president were being held today and the candidates were George W. Bush, the Republican and John Kerry, the Democrat, for whom would you vote: Bush, or Kerry?" Names rotated

George W. Bush John Kerry Unsure
% % %
3/04 46 49 5

"If the November general election for president were being held today and the candidates were George W. Bush, the Republican, John Kerry, the Democrat, and Ralph Nader running as an independent, for whom would you vote: Bush, Kerry or Nader?" Names rotated

George W. Bush John Kerry Ralph Nader Unsure
% % % %
3/04 44 47 4 5

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm

[bluestateguy]

1. I want the following said after each poll write-up

"If you take Nader out of this race, Kerry wins comfortably", after every poll.

[mikey_1962]

2. I don't think Nader will get on the ballot... so those should go to

Kerry. Maybe he should change the spelling to Nadir.

[mobuto]

4. They won't, according to the poll

In a head-to-head match, Kerry still wins by only three points - according to the LA Times poll, 49-46.

How that translates to real world results on a state-to-state basis remains unclear.

[mikey_1962]

10. The Nader vote divides evenly? That is counterintuitive...

I thought the Nader vote would all go to Kerry.

[WitchWay]

25. counterintuitive, indeed!

And even Nader says so.

But, I've got two conservative folks in my own family who are big Nader fans and voters. Nader has interesting, and surprising demographics. Alot of his support, in fact, comes from independents.

Yep. Nader says that his numbers seem counterintuitve, unless you understand his demographics, this is what Nader about has to say in his letter to ABB democrats from his website:

"In 2000, exit polls showed that 21% or 25% of my vote would have gone to Bush, 38% or 41% to Gore, and the rest would not have voted. Counter-intuitive, isn't it? Not if you know that conservative and libertarian Republicans have not been happy with the corporate Republicans who dominate the party and concede to their right wing the verbal platforms to keep them in line. Now, many conservative or libertarian Republicans are furious with Bush over the massive deficits, taxpayer-funded, corporate subsidies, the Patriot Act's invasion of privacy and undermining of civil liberties, the impaired sovereignty issues in NAFTA and GATT, uncontrolled corporate pornography beamed to their children in violent commercial entertainment -- to name some points of serious disappointments."

Nader thinks that eventually Dems will vote Dem, and that the Bush folks who can't bring themselves to vote for the massachusetts liberal Kerry will be able to vote for Nader as a protest vote. I have a feeling its working, from the polls that I see.

[Laf.La.Dem.]

3. Nader

I do not understand how Ralph Nader can be "polling" 5%:freak:

[buff2]

5. I don't understand that low of a poll number for Kerry

in CALIFORNIA. To give bu$h 44%? He should be below 30.

[mobuto]

6. Uh, the poll was conducted nationwide

that's the point - Kerry's leading Bush across the board.

[wryter2000]

7. It's a California paper

But it's a nationwide poll. The LA Times is one of the best papers in the country. Some people think it's the best.

[lancdem]

8. Because it's registered voters

that's not the same as likely voters.

[mobuto]

9. Exactly

And Nader supporters are by far the least likely demographic to vote.

[59millionmorons]

17. Or adults

The last Gallup poll showing Bush ahead was of adults only.

[MoonRiver]

12. Repukes trying to skew perception.

Those pieces of ca-ca will stop at nothing to spin and win. They are the most devious and deceptive people in our fair nation.

Welcome to DU Laf.La.Dem! :hi:

[Beetwasher]

11. Just More Evidence

as far as I'm concerned that Gallup is a bought and paid for propoganda arm of the WH.

Without fail, whenever Bush is in trouble, Gallup comes out w/ a poll that shows growing Bush support that's the opposite of just about every other poll. If Bush is dropping in every poll, Gallup comes out w/ a poll that shows him going up.

Every other poll I've seen shows the Clarke allegations having SOME erosional effect on Bush support, including this LAT poll. And whaddaya know, Gallup shows the exact opposite in their most recent poll.

More on Gallup here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=534560

[TheStateChief]

13. I don't know if one is necessarily better than the other...

Gallup used a majority of likely voters while LA Times used registered voters and non-registered adults. The LA Times results aren't as qualified as the Gallup poll but I don't think that changes the fact that the race remains a toss-up whether you look at Gallup, Rasmussen, LA Times or any of the other polls that are out there.

[Beetwasher]

14. Oh, The Race is a Toss-Up, No Doubt

I'm just remarking on the evidence I've seen regarding Gallup polls. There is a DEFINITE pattern. Read the thread in the link I posted. They've done some VERY suspicious things poll-wise that are only explicable in terms of WH propoganda.

[TheStateChief]

15. Yeah, I know there are concerns, but Kerry was leading 3 weeks ago

and was up +12 just last month in the Gallup poll. He's lost 34 points in the Battleground states. I know there's a long time to go. I know that national polls don't really matter. I know that the race is still neck-and-neck. But you have to admit that's a tremendous loss in just a matter of weeks.

[mobuto]

16. 34 points in the battleground states?

Huh? Kerry was +12 last month for the simple fact that the Democratic primaries and caucuses received all the press coverage, while Bush got nothing. He was artificially high and he's since come back to earth. Nobody believed at the time that Kerry would win the election by 12 points. Its going to be another very close election, and even if one candidate wins an electoral landslide, which seems unlikely, the difference in popular vote will be well under +/-5%.

Bush has spent more than $25,000,000 in television ads this past month; Kerry has spent almost nothing. That Kerry is leading in any polls is really a surprise in and of itself.

[Beetwasher]

18. Eh? 34 points? Where do you get that?

Tremendous loss? Baloney! I don't have to admit that at all, it's ridiculous actually. Kerry is STILL ahead in most polls and this is after a $40 million barrage of negative Bush campaigning. By all historical standards, at this point in the game Bush should be WAY ahead of Kerry. Kerry's in GREAT shape at this point.

[The Magistrate]

23. It Is A Fun But Meaningless Trick, Sir

Defeatists, and the enemy's manipulators, are fond of it. Here is how it works: if one candidate is ahead by an average of 3 points in a dozen a states two weeks ago, and now is barely even on average in those same states, then "a 36 point lead has been lost!" It affords occassion for a great deal of hyper-ventilation, and claims that the sky is falling, but has nothing to do with real analysis.

"Figures lie, and liars figure."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Beetwasher]

24. Yeah, I Figured It Must Have

been something like that. It also figures that the poster I responded to is nowhere in sight to defend his erroneous spew...

[59millionmorons]

19. WRONG

Gallup only polled adults

These results are based on telephone interviews with a randomly selected national sample of 1,001 adults, aged 18 years and older, conducted March 26-28, 2004. For results based on this sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum error attributable to sampling and other random effects is ±3 percentage points. In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

[West Coast Democrat]

20. Yes, race is a toss-up at this point

But a "popular incumbent" should have a comfortable lead at this point.

[GOPBasher]

21. It's a statistical dead-heat.

Whether Bush is up by three like in Gallup, or Kerry is up by three like in the L.A. Times, it's a statistical dead-heat. Three points is within the margin of error.

[digno dave]

22. haven't we learned, it's the Electroral College, stupid.

We need poll tracking in the 15-20 ballteground states.
Wouldn't it be insideous if GW were to winn the electoral but lose the popular...AGAIN!!!
GW would really think he had a mandate then!!! HAHAHAHAHA

[Skeptical Democrat]

26. While it would sure be nice to have those undecided's in the Kerry

column instead of the Nader, that is still not good news for Bush either.

I continue to keep my skepticism in check and hope for the best.

[Lexingtonian]

27. same as every other national poll

If this is a normal competitive election you can split Undecideds 2:1 for the challenger (the usual ratio, often low) and set Nader's vote at 3% (the likely voters who consistently haven't voted for either major party candidate in Presidential elections in the recent couple of go-arounds) at the ballot box.

That projects the outcome as Kerry 51%, Bush 46%, Nader 3%.

Which is not very interesting unless you (take my word for it) look at the slew of polling so far and, analyzed this way and discounting for Nader support among people who won't actually vote, you can see that 90% of them converge on numbers within single percentage points of this 51/46/3 split.