SwiftVets.com

[Doc Jerry]

I don't get it. The president's poll numbers are dropping with some vets.
Explanations welcomed. I can't believe the attacks against the president's Guard duty have any affect whatsoever. But then the glass is half-full, Kerry's numbers keep tanking.


Medics, we're there when you need us.

[ASPB]

Could you provide some links to support this conclusion?
_________________
On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB

[Navy_Navy_Navy]

Sorry, there's no poll on earth among veterans that would prove to me that Bush is slipping among veterans.

Which one are you looking at? The source is usually the answer, in and of itself.

For instance, CNN poll? Automatic peg on the bullsnitometer.
_________________
~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother

[BB Stacker]

Yeh, I'd have to see a link to that too. I think such a thing is possible depending on who is asking the question(s) and the comparison to past polls. These things can be slanted by a clever pollster.

[BC]

[air_vet]

[Doc Jerry]

Everyone:

I wish I could provide a link, but it was on John Gibson's show this afternoon when I heard it. I had the tv on and just caught the piece out of the corner of my eye. John said the numbers (and I cannot recall what poll it was) dropped from 60% to 50%. I'm sure I heard that part correctly and it blew my mind.


Medics, we're there when you need us.

[ontheright]

I heard the same poll results on the radio this afternoon and FOX News reported it this evening also. Didn't hear the source for the report. Sorry. The only thing I've found online in regards to Bush slipping in the polls among veterans is old stuff.

[Guest]

[Doc Jerry]

I agree. I'm going to try to find out what poll they were referring to. There's no way on God's green earth; those numbers reported are even close to being accurate.


Medics, we're there when you need us.

[Steve Z]

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/092304_poll.pdf

I looked into the details of the latest Fox News poll, which shows Bush leading 45-43 in a two-way race, but leading among Veterans 50-40.

Bush with only a two-point margin might look scary, but methinks there is something amiss with the sample. In the table under question 7, we find:

Democrats: Bush 8 Kerry 83
Republicans: Bush 92 Kerry 3
Independents: Bush 40 Kerry 37

If Bush gets 9% more Republicans than Kerry gets Democrats, Bush gets 5% more Democrats than Kerry gets Republicans, and Bush leads by 3% among Independents, how does Bush only lead by 2% among the total sample? Probably because there are more Democrats than Republicans in the sample! But in the general electorate, registration is about even between the parties.

If you took a hypothetical sample of 1/3 Republicans, 1/3 Democrats, and 1/3 Independents and assumed the above splits between the candidates among each group, Bush would lead 47 - 41 overall. An average of most of the national polls (http://www.realclearpolitics.com) shows Bush with a 5.6% lead right now.

In other words, Fox took a sample skewed toward Democrats, and what should have been a 6-point lead for Bush became a 2-point lead. Probably there were more Democrat veterans than Republican veterans in this group (although the numbers can't be calculated with the information available), which would have affected the veterans' choice in this poll.

When trying to interpret poll numbers, it's important to look at the poll "internals" to see if there's a bias in the sample, and not just look at the "bottom line", which can be misleading. The devil is in the details!!!

I also read an interesting poll coming out of Florida recently, which showed Kerry leading by 1% whereas two other polls showed Bush leading by 3% and 8% respectively. It turns out that the poll that gave Kerry the 1% lead was taken during Hurricane Ivan, which wiped out telephone service in the heavily-Republican panhandle, and the rest of the state was nearly tied. Oops!!!

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/commentary.html#9_23_04_1206

Polls can be deceptive...but I still think the SBVT ad no. 6 should be run in FL, if enough $$$ is available!
_________________
The traitor will crater!

[margie]

Do you think it could have anything to do with the showing of Fahrenhite 9/11 to our troops? Which is happening. Makes me sick, especially showing it to the troops in Iraq.

[neverforget]

In addition, over-weighting with Democrats is going against a national trend of increasing identification and registration of voters as Republicans. It is also going against the method by which Dick Morris says reveals the most effective results.
_________________
US Army Security Agency
1965-1971

[neverforget]

Even though we are now older veterans, there are still many of our parent's generation still around. And they still believe FDR, HST, and JFK are gods.
_________________
US Army Security Agency
1965-1971

[Whacker77]

I wouldn't get worried yet. There are always statistical blips in polling. More than likely that's what occurred here. There was also bound to be some slippage in veteran support as the swift boat controversy dissapated. The margin of error for the veteran poll was eight percent. No need to worry yet.

I also want to make a point about the Fox, Zogby, and NBC polls. They are weighted for party I.D. and they almost always guarantee a close out come. Polls that allow party I.D. to fluctuate probably give a more accurate reading of the stiuation. Or, we could always just split the difference. Bush ahead six!