Cali-for-ni-a ----Kerry 46 Bush 45 Survey USA

pretty pathetic
given the current bad press for the Bush admin.




http://www.surveyusa.com/currentelectionpolls.html

maybe the poll was freeped

No undecided will go for Bush.

if Bush believed he was that close, he'd be talking about it every second. It's wrong. Unless I'm wrong.

Plus I worry about Gov. Terminator doing a full court press for Bush.

Bush is not popular in Cali-for-n-i-a

well above 50% in California.

just two weeks ago. But I guess you have to be a Californian to know about this poll. Kerry led 53 to 41 without Nader and 49 to 39 with.

Here's the link for those who are interested...along with a couple of paragraphs.

Bush Approval Hits a Low Point in State is the headline.

"President Bush's popularity in California has dropped to the lowest level of his presidency amid rising public concern over his handling of Iraq and the economy, according to a new Los Angeles Times poll that found dislike of Bush driving support for his Democratic rival."

http://www.latimes.com/news/custom/timespoll/la-me-poll23apr23,1,2857451.story?coll=la-home-headlines

Guess it's an incredibly volatile electorate, or someone is a little off. The Times poll surveyed twice as many as ARG.

Let's keep this in perspective. The hand-wringing on this site strikes me as somewhat duplicitous.

but I've never seen a President hit by so much bad press.

I visit this site. Go to Emerging Democratic Majority for some good analysis of the polls, especially of the battleground states. Let's do more than just make knee-jerk postings that, as I said, seem to me to be rather duplicitous. Check this out... He knows a lot more about polls that any of us do.

http://www.emergingdemocraticmajorityweblog.com/donkeyrising/index.php

Survey USA has as good a track record of any of the other polls.

By the way, try to avoid using the word "duplicitous" in your next post. Using it on three consecutive posts would be bad form.

with a member of the Deanocratic Underground. Read some of the other posts that support my argument. Go to Emerging Democratic Majority. Read the interview with Zogby on Salon. Get educated!!

In this post you imply that I disagree with you because I need education.

I've had enough exposure to poll methodology to know that it is an extremely inexact science. The element in this poll that causes concern is that Kerry is tied with Bush while Boxer leads Jones (who had been elected to statewide office in California) by nine points.

Although at this point I feel I could use some. I don't want to insult you. I just want to point out that there is a lot of other information out there that counters the ARG poll. And, as a resident of California, and a veteran of (I hate to admit it) nine presidential elections, I don't think Californian has a prayer of going for Bush. And, I don't think the self-interested Schwarzenegger has any coattails. Believe me, I've been deluded before. I worked in five states for George McGovern and had hope, even up to the end. But I was so much younger then... I've also worked in Chicago City Hall and saw some inside politics that would curl your hair. I think, though, what is realistically encouraging about this election is what Donkey Rising (and Zogby) points out--that people don't like the direction we're headed and they want someone else in charge. That could all change--as events just this past week have shown, the future is certainly unpredictable. And Nov. is a long way off. But California...even with its conservative districts (and there are plenty of them) I think things like the environment, no federal funding for "No Child Left Behind" (my kids' public schools have a huge budget shortfall) choice, ENRON (we still remember) are all strikes against Bush.

The cheap shots were inexcusable and I apologize. Sometimes all the negative Kerry stuff (and I'm not including this thread--it just set me off) on DU is really dispiriting. When the medals/ribbons threads get more responses than anti-Bush threads, it's a little hard to take. I'm also sick of the almost daily polls--although I have to admit, I'm probably one of the first to check them out.

To end a long and rambling thread...

It's not an entirely bad night...Angels won in a shutout-- pitched by John Lackey. Complete game.

I acknowledge that other polls exist that are more favorable.

Schwarzenegger's win left me (a Texan) very frightened. I agree that a Bush win would be absurd, but no less absurd than Schwarzenegger's.

My only hope is Kerry's acceptance speech at the Democratic convention.

I was totally unimpressed by Gore in his 2000 speech and yet he leapt upward in the polls. If Kerry can give a great speech, then I will be greatly relieved.

My Astros won tonight, so I too am moderately pleased.

I was unimpressed too and I'm such a diehard Democrat I try to find out what party the candidates represent in nonpartisan races so that I don't accidentally vote for a Republican.

Kerry, at least, has been fighting back. But he has the advantage of knowing what happened to Gore. I know a lot of people here don't think much of Kerry's speaking style, but I think he comes across with the gravity and seriousness we need now. I think he'll do OK at the convention. I just hope that outside events don't drown him out (this reminds me of the sixties--where the dominant image was Daley screaming F... you, not Humphrey's speech).

I wouldn't be surprised if Bush gets some sort of weird rally bump from this prison torture scandal. But it will be short-lived if he gets one at all. I think the American people are going through Kubler-Ross's stages of grief with Bush--denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance. They really wanted to believe Bush was a strong, good leader after 9/11. It's taking some time getting used to the fact that it was all a sham.

Now...this has gone way off the topic... rambling...G'nite.

Why isn't this a slam dunk???

Period.

California: Kerry 51% Bush 40%
California 2004 Presidential Ballot

Bush 40%
Kerry 51%
Other 5%
Not Sure 4%
RasmussenReports.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
April 25, 2004--In the state of California, a Rasmussen Reports survey finds that Massachusetts Senator John F. Kerry leads President George W. Bush by eleven points, 51% to 40%. That spread matches the 11 point margin of victory earned by Al Gore four years ago.

A month ago, Rasmussen Reports polling found Kerry leading in California by nine points.

more... http://www.rasmussenreports.com/California_April.htm

Rassmussen is a better poll

and has Kerry at 51-41 over Bush in MI.

California scares me.

Its a tracking poll done by machines that most sane people hang up on, and their state polls are even less reliable that their national polls

The bulk of poll in California over the last month of so show rather different results:

Rasmussen | 4/17-24 502 L 5.0% 40% 51% - Kerry +11 Gore +11
LA Times | 4/17-21 1,265 R 3.0% 39% 49% 6% Kerry +10 -
Rasmussen | 3/5-11 445 L 5.0% 44% 53% - Kerry +9 -
LA Times | 2/18-22 560 LD 4.0% 40% 53% - Kerry +13


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/bush_vs_kerry_sbys2.html#ca

Kerry has been holding double digit leads in California for several months, and many of the SUSA polls have been ad odds with a many of the other polls in other states as well.

Even so, this polls still has Kerry ahead, and it is likely that as a result of this poll, the other pollsters will do a few polls to chsck out the validity of SUSA's poll soon.

I dont know how many Hispanics were polled in California, but a recnt Hispanic Poll for California had Kerry with almost a 30 point lead over Bush in that that State.



A recent Los Angeles Times poll of California found Kerry favored by 58 percent of Latinos surveyed to 36 percent for Bush.

Thursday, May 6, 2004

GOP, Democrats court Latino vote, which could decide election

By CARLA MARINUCCI AND CHRIS McGANN
HEARST REPORTERS



Polls show Kerry with a significant advantage among all voters in California while Bush is far ahead in his home state of Texas, another state with a large Latino voting bloc. But the strategies the candidates are using to win over Latinos in California are the same ones they will use to reach these voters in states where the contest is close, such as New Mexico, Arizona and Florida


http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/172151_latino06.html


This is a breakdown of the Latino Vote in every election since Carter:

Year Percentage for candidates


2000 Al Gore (D) 61%

George W. Bush (R) 38%


Ralph Nader (G) 1%


1996 Bill Clinton (D) 71%

Bob Dole (R) 21%

Ross Perot (I) 7%

1992 Bill Clinton (D) 53%


George H.W. Bush (R) 31%


Ross Perot (I) 16%


1988 Michael S. Dukakis (D) 62%


George H.W. Bush (R) 37%


1984 Walter F. Mondale (D) 51%


Ronald Reagan (R) 46%


1980 Jimmy Carter (D) 56%


Ronald Reagan (R) 37%


Other 7%


1976 Jimmy Carter (D) 82%


Gerald Ford (R) 18%


With every new revelation about Bush's Administration, the reponse time in polls seems to be about on month. The current down swing IN Bush's polling numbers seem to still be a reaction to the 9/11 commission rather than the stuff about the degradin treatment of Iraqi's that has been hitting the news lately. People tend to change their minds rather slowly, and is seems to take a several revelations about the administration before people who are not sure, or only leaning towards Bush to admit that perhaps the information that they are being given is more than an error, or a small limited event that Bush had nothing to do with.

The fact that the most recent Fox/Ipso pollshows that the largest area that Bush us starting to loose support from is in the South and among Republican Women.Bush had close to a five percent drop in this poll, and the polling data was collected just before the full revelations about torture in Iraq was revealed. Polls taken this weekend might start reflecting some effects on Bush, but initially sometimes Bush goes up a bit at first, in a sort of circling the wagons effect, sort of in support of the nation against all those people outside who are trying to shoot us down, and then the polls seem to setlte in with people actually thinking about what is responsible for them people ouot there trying to set the wagons on fire.

He will be a force in this election.

the groundwork to run for President. What was his recent visit to Israel about? It seemed an odd trip for him to take unless he's making a preemptive strike--thinking ahead (a shield against his father's Nazi past). If it looks like Bush is going down, he'll stand aside--maybe even hold the door open.

Arnold is very ambitious and is looking ahead...far past W.

Especially in California. And in a lot of other states. Whn they vote for a Republican GOvernor, they ten to move for Democrats at the federal level, like in the Senate and the President. SOrt of Vote for George Bush for President, but Vote for Gray Davis for Goveror. Or Pataki for Governor, but Kerry is in double digits for President in New York, and Hillary became Senator. There seems to be a desire to vote locally for a Governor who will cut local taxes, but to vote for a Democrat at for offices in Washintgon who will not cut taxes and send money to the states. Local taxes seem to go up more regularly and have more of an effect on people than federal taxes which are rarely increased to the degree that local taxes are, and usually the voters in a state expect that tyheir representative in Washington will sort of rearrage programs in Washington in such a way that taxes dont go up but Government money for local program is increased by cutting someone else.

I have no faith in California voters.

Schwarzenegger, (spelled with a ch, by the way) is not going to win it for Bush. Unless you're indulging in wishful thinking.

Did you think that he would win the Governors race?

Wish people here would read it and quit the pointless hand-wringing. There are states we need to worry about. California is not one of them.

About some polls that are skewed widly from most of the other polls is that the pollsters have been hired to do a poll and expected results are hinted at. SOrt of like some Republicans are worreid about Bush's polls in a certain area, and have someone who has done other polls do a poll for them but indicate the tyoe of results they would like to see, or suggest sources to used for the list of randomly selected people being polled. I used to work for a local government and we would hire marketing people to take polls to determine services the public wanted or where they wanted new facilities placed. For example, all of the demographics and initial polls taken to determine where to place a new 80 million dollar main library branch indicated that the library be built further west in the county that floadted a bond issue to raise money for capital expenditure projects, because over the prior ten years the demographic center of the county shifed about 8 miles west and two miles north, But the politicians of the largest local ciity in the area refused to allow the county to build the a new, very expanded county jail across the street from the county courthouse and build nothing else there becasue they felt it would totally destroy their downtown area which was losing tons of businesses who were all moving west. So they hore the same marketing firm to do another polls which found out that the best place to place the new library, and the new governmental center was right on the same downtown street that the new jail was going to be built on.The result was an 80 million dollar building that was almost never used by the public except at the direst need, and the main clientele were goverment employees working in the Governmental center across the street. For a while a few other office buildings were built but half of the office space remained empty for two decades and most of the buisnesses that were coaxed to come to the area either moved or went out of buisness. I mean some of the buisinesses were historical businesses that had been associated with the area for years and folded as a result of the politics of the situation.

When I see a poll that almost totally reverses the apparent trends of several months, and I also see that other polls taken about the political odds for other political elected offical who will be representatives at the federal level remaining the same, my suspicion is that some conservative elements involved in the local media want to create the impression that their boy is starting to do better in the area, to make the Democrats a bit worried, and to try to sway the undecided to choose the person who other people seem to want to win (most people like to be on the winning side, its a normal human trait). It think the Bush people are getting concerned about what appears to be Kerry;s hold in California, so someone financed a poll, and hinted at the reults they wanted to see. Besides, it also creates more for the media to bandy about in order to havesomething to write about, (its turning into a close race folks... who will win...)california has not been much in the news as one of the battleground states with Bush and Kerry duking it out. So lets shake things up a bit. If I four or five more polls done by a lot of different pollsters from differnt types of organizations (universities, newpspapers, national television, etc) I might then give credence to the race getting closer. But right now appear to be too much in Kerry's favor in California for me to give credence to one poll. Its a shame that there are no pollsters who do polls as a social service, rather than to make money.

as long as they have those scary "voting" machines I DO worry.

That's not good...

There is no way there has been a 10 percent shift in California in the last two weeks. Nothing in the news here would account for that shift.

635 polled, with a margin of error of 4%.

This poll is crap...

Given the Republicans have the governorship, anyone considering voting Green in that state needs to be conscious of what they are doing. Saying this state will be a cakewalk sends the wrong message; if Ralphie and/or Camejo gets 7% in California, we may have four more years of Bushler.

it was a landslide win for Gore (even without running ads there), and it will be the same for Kerry....but I wouldn't mind Bush wasting millions of dollars on campaigning and commercials once again.

It would be a shame to lose those 55 electoral votes by placing a DLC Republican-type on the ticket. Currently, Maxine is more popular than Boxer out here in California. Of course, Kucinich as VP would guarantee him the election.

This company hit the recall of Davis and Ahnold's election right on the head.

The same poll also has Boxer destroying her challenger.

Wasn't it something like 60% of the voters who chose a republican last October?

This is something to be worried about, do not take California for granted.

the first is the margin of error is 4%. so within that margin best case scenario is Kerry at 50% and * at 41%, very close to the 2000 results. That seems about accurate.

the second is that polls are only within the margin of error 95% of the time. This looks like one of the 5%.

All other polls show Kerry destroying *, I wouldn't be worried at all. There was also some poll showing Gore and * close up until 2000, all others showed Gore far ahead, and Gore won easily. Unfortunately Gore ended up spending some money in the state, which would've been better spent elsewhere.

This poll is so out of whack it is rediculous. If Kerry is leading Bush in Ohio and Florida there is no way he is only ahead by one-point in California. I don't trust Survey USA.

.... Kept showing Dan Lungren 10-15 % points ahead of Gray Davis ... they said Bush was within 5 % in CA in 2000 ...

BOTH lost by wide margins ...

SurveyUSA is full of shit .... It MUST be RNC affiliated ...

Get some sleep, before you recklessly post something you might regret later ....

I hate when that happens ...

not at your post.

With a recent poll in OHIO giving Kerry a 7 point edge? No way.

is one of the great mysteries......

I have friends who are pollsters and i mentioned this to them and they basically dismissed it... Kerry will win CA they say by at least a very solid margin, just look at all the other polls that have come out...

I think Survey USA smells stinky... all other polls show a big lead for Kerry in CA:
http://www.davidwissing.com/bushkerrystate2004.html

Who Did it When Bush Kerry Nader
Survey USA May 4-6 45 46 -
Rasmussen Apr 17-24 40 51 -
LA Times Apr 17-21 39 49 6
LA Times Apr 17-21 41 53 -

Bush win anywhere near that in Cali. Bet that

my state going Bush. Bush or Kerry? No contest. It's Kerry all the way. While I've heard a lot of disappointment with Kerry, I've also heard total negation of Bush. Even in my very Bush friendly region, many repubs are not happy with him and are currently favoring Kerry.

It's early. We've got a long, long way to go before November. And many more potential "events" that may swing polls one way or another. Even with the mindless, insensible Arnold fervor, I don't think Bush can take CA.

Anyway, Kerry will have this Californian's vote, if I'm still living here next fall.