Bombing to Win

Hume: A Preemptive Strike on North Korea Would Be a `Successful Strategy'   »

This morning on Fox News Sunday, Brit Hume said North Korea's missiles are "sitting there like the Washington Monument" and "knocking the missiles out" would be "a successful possible strategy."

So, if it is not Iran it will be North Korea. I am guessing Sept 15 2006 or October 15 2006.

There's more...

Nausea and Glee

There are two things that continue to make me sick to my stomach about our collective glee over the polls. They are that while we are rejoicing in the appropriately low poll ratings for the Abomination, and appropriately high ratings for the generic Dem (Congressman and Senator), we are neglecting two very important points: 1. the Abomination is not running, and 2. polls still show that when asked if they would vote to reelect their Congressman or Senators the majority say yes. Since the majority of incumbent Congressman and Senators are Republicans, the people are actually stating that they want Republicans to maintain control. (I will now vomit).

If any one has news to dissipate my queasiness, please share it...

There's more...

AP Poll: Democratic Congress Preferred

AP Poll: Democratic Congress Preferred

By WILL LESTER Associated Press Writer

January 06,2006 | WASHINGTON --

Dissatisfied with the nation's direction, Americans are leaning toward wanting a change in which political party leads Congress -- preferring that Democrats take control, an AP-Ipsos poll found. Democrats are favored over Republicans 49 percent to 36 percent.

Taking the Wind Out

Does the move, scurrying may be a better word, on the part of the Republicans to embrace withdrawal rhetoric, and perhaps some action, take the wind out of the momentum the Democrats were hoping for in 2006? That is, their refusal to say and do anything other than "stay the course [as long is my butt is not threatened]" was drawing a sharp political divide that will now be blurred. That divide was a hopeful sign, according to the polls, for us to regain the Congress and White House.

Slate has an interesting analysis

Slate has an interesting analysis at

Bottom line:  
Whichever candidate takes two of these: Florida, Ohio, and Minnesota (not a typo) wins.

Incumbent Rule

Does the incumbent rule requiring a min. of 50% (but has been stated in many places as only requiring 48-49% this year) refer to an average or the poll on Nov 1st, or to any specific poll?

Sidney Zion: What Zogby tells me: Kerry wins


Pollster John Zogby, in a telephone interview with me yesterday, predicted that John Kerry will win the election. "It's close," he said, "but in the last couple of days things have been trending toward Kerry - nationally and in the swing states. Between this and history, I think it will be Kerry."

When Zogby talks, politicians listen. He made his bones in the Bill Clinton-Bob Dole election of 1996, when he came within one-tenth of a percentage point of the final tally.

Bet me that when the Bushies read what Zogby told me, not just the rhetoric will rise, but so will the fever.

Particularly since one of their favorite columnists, Robert Novak, reported in yesterday's Washington Post that Zogby called the race for President Bush in a conversation he had with the pollster on Monday.

Zogby was jocular about the Novak column, although he has decided not to post a comment on his Web site. Here's what he told me: "I said Bush was winning, I didn't say I thought he'd win. On Monday, he was indeed looking good. But on Tuesday, things changed. Kerry, in that one day, picked up 5 points."

Well, what about New Jersey? Al Gore took the Garden State by 16 points, and now the Quinnipiac poll makes it even. If Kerry loses Jersey, it could be a landslide for Bush, no, Mr. Zogby?

I could hear Zogby shrug. "New Jersey?" he said. "Take out your navy blue crayon and color Jersey dark. I don't even poll New Jersey."

The politicians of both parties appear to agree. If they believed Jersey was in play, Kerry and Bush would be in Newark and Jersey City on the spot. But nobody showed.

Maurice Carroll nodded - I heard that on the phone, too. Mickey runs the Quinnipiac poll, and being straight, he said, "It makes me trepidatious about our numbers."


"I've gotta look it up, too," he laughed. "But of course when the politicians pay no attention, we have to wonder if we got it right."

And then he added: "Maybe because our poll had 6% undecided. Historically, the undecided vote goes big to the challenger."

Polls, polls, polls. Is that all there is, Alfie?

Let's check the London line. The legal bookies across the sea have been uncannily right over the years on our elections. They probably called 1776 for George Washington.

And on this one, the Republicans have to love it.

The latest line from sunny old England makes Bush, in their funny lingo, a 4-7 favorite. (Vegas would say it 7-4.) That's almost 2-to-1.

From Alan Abramowitz, professor of political science at Emory University

And posted on the Center for American Progress web site ( Summing up the polls for the last two weeks of the campaign.

"What these results indicate is that the day-to-day movements of the tracking polls are essentially random. Rather than reflecting real shifts in voter preferences, the day-to-day movements of the tracking polls are simply reflecting sampling error. This doesn't mean that the overall results of these polls are wrong. In fact, the average margin between George Bush and John Kerry in the tracking polls has been very close to the average margin in other recent national polls. It just means that the day-to-day shifts in the tracking polls are probably not real and that the real level of support for George Bush and John Kerry within the electorate has not changed over the past few weeks: the presidential race has been very close since the beginning of October and it is likely to remain that way until Election Day.

"So relax political junkies. Stop obsessing over the daily movements of the tracking polls and get a life! Follow the World Series. Follow your favorite college or professional football team. Follow the weather report. Follow something that is more real than the day-to-day movements of the tracking polls."

For my own part, I am heading to Florida to help.

It seems reasonable for me to respond

It seems reasonable for me to respond to the many comments made about by diary on “Simple”. First, I am a biostatistician and epidemiologist and I base my comments about the lack of significance on the fact that the polls are with in the margin of error. That means the change they you see is more likely not than likely to be real. Second, the confidence intervals found in is some of  the electoral web site postings include zero. This means that the finding of any changes is not likely to be real. I have been in e-mail contact with many of them and they do not disagree with this. Secondly, my concern about IA and WI is comes from an observation the social trends in those states. WI has a liberal history (especially compared to other mid-western states), that has been fading in the past few cycles (note Gore’s margin). I have no idea what a troll is, but do believe all here are entitled to respect.

It's Much Simpler Than It has Been Stated Here on MyDD

The near constant obsessions with non-statistically relevant changes in polls I have been addictively reading here for the past few days are missing the one simple, key point. Kerry can not win unless he takes PA, OH, and FL. If he wins IA, NM or WI it will be because he has passed a threshold of wide-based support, in which case he will win PA, OH, and FL anyway. He will not win IA. There is no indication that he will win WI, and NM could be traded for HI. This sad reality is haunting.


Advertise Blogads