After the primaries: is it normal for Kerry to be leading now?

[bagnana]

I have seen so many discussions going both ways on this issue. Does anyone know whether Kerry's current poll lead over Bush is historically consistent with past elections? I thought that usually the winner of the primaries emerged so battered by the fight to the finish that they were usually behind the incumbent, with a lot of catching up to do before election. Wasn't that the case with Al Gore? I would like to read up on this but can't find the info. Does anyone know?

[theorist]

1. I haven't been around long enough to make a statement

from experience, but my gut is telling me that this race will be like no other. Direct manipulation of media outlets by one side and an educated and energized base on the other. I'm hoping that it comes down to who has the best "Get out the vote" campaigns, and this would be a direct result of the polarization of the American populace.

[Ksec]

2. a sitting Pres should be way ahead if hes doing a decent job

Gore was way back for a pretty long while and caught up later.

Normally I would say that the Pres should be winning easily with the bully pulpit

[BillZBubb]

3. It's not unusual

Bush* started leading Gore in January of 2000 polls. It took Gore right up to the election to take the lead.

Of course, Bush* is the incumbent pResident. So, he should have a lead at this point if he was halfway competent. As this thing plays out, though, the power of incumbency will start showing up.

[arewethereyet]

4. its perfectly normal and it will reverse

so forget the polls till October, they'll drift here and there till the conventions, go nuts back and forth there and then we'll see where things are for real when te voters actually start thinking about the election.

[Jane Austin]

10. Polls

But . . . for my money, being ahead now is a lot better than
being behind.  

I mean, at least we don't have to make up those differential
points.

[TomNickell]

5. It's bad news for Bush.

The sitting President is a known quantity. Kerry is unknown to most voters. He's not the official nominee yet. Hasn't named a VP. Hasn't had his convention. So, Bush is still losing to an empty chair.

Doesn't mean it can't reverse later, of course.

[buff2]

9. How ironic.......

An empty suit losing to an empty chair. :D

[arcos]

6. Clinton was leading Dole in 1996...

CNN/TIME POLL
March 6-7
Registered Voters'
Presidential Choice


Now February
Clinton 49% 52%
Dole 40 39

Sampling error: +/-3.5% pts



---

CNN/TIME POLL
March 6-7
Registered Voters'
Presidential Choice

Clinton 46%
Dole 33
Perot 14

Sampling error: +/-3.5% pts



on edit: forgot the link
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/polls/cnn.time/030696.shtml

[bagnana]

8. thanks

My personal feelings of urgency make me want to believe this election is unlike any other of recent memory, because the dems are so damn angry at Bush. It is quite a phenomenon. He is just that awful.

[onehandle]

7. Normal when your opponent is trending badly...

As Bush is. Bush is in trouble...Dad style.

[radfringe]

11. I'm waiting for a reply

sent an e-mail off to a friend of mine who teaches poli-sci, specializes in presidential campaigns

will post it when I get it