Lieberman Continues Lead in South Carolina

[Nicholas_J]

Released: August 01, 2003
Lieberman Continues Lead in South Carolina, Gephardt and Sharpton Tied for Second; 65% of Likely Democratic Primary Voters Think Bush Will Win Re-Election, New Zogby Poll Reveals



Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut continues to lead the pack of Democratic presidential hopefuls in South Carolina polling, as he did in March, according to a new poll by Zogby International. He is the only candidate in double digits at 13%, followed by Missouri Congressman Richard Gephardt and civil rights activist Rev. Al Sharpton, tied at 8%.

North Carolina Senator John Edwards is tied with Massachusetts Senator John Kerry at 5% each. Former Vermont Governor Dr. Howard Dean is 6th in South Carolina at 4%, followed by Florida Senator Bob Graham (3%), former Illinois Senator Carol Mosley Braun (3%), and Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich (0.2%). More than four in ten (42%) say they are undecided.

The poll of 501 likely voters in the South Carolina February 3, 2004 Democratic primary was conducted July 26 – 30 by Zogby International as part of the Road to Boston series. It has a margin of error of +/- 4.5%, and margins are higher in sub-groups.

Candidate
SC July 2003
SC March 2003

Lieberman
13%
12%

Gephardt
8
10

Sharpton
8
4

Edwards
5
6

Kerry
5
5

Dean
4
1

Graham
3
2

Mosley Braun
3
2

Kucinich
0.2
0.3

[opihimoimoi]

1. Poor Joe, He jus don look presidential, neither does Dennis

Buh Bye you 2 guys.

In this Nation, looks is what counts, never mind what the hell is said, its looks.

Remember Gary bauer... he was toast. Besides, he couldn't even flip a flapjack without falling off the stage.

[ProfessorPlum]

5. I know you are being a little bit facetious with this post

but we should remember that Gary Bauer was toast because not only did he look like a weird kind of chihuahua dog, he was also a scary right wing nut case!

[whirlygigspin]

2. pro Bush democrats?

65% of Likely Democratic Primary Voters in SC
think Bush Will Win Re-Election.

Now there's a supportive bunch.

[last_texas_dem]

11. Sad...

Though slightly better than a national poll that, I believe, said 67-percent of Democrats believed the Chimp would be re-elected.

Although this obviously doesn't mean these Democrats are supportive of Bush, even if the majority of "Democrats for Bush" come from the southern states. I myself think that, at this time, Shrub will be re-elected. It's not because I support him AT ALL- I can hardly stand to think about him- but I'm just a pessimist and have lost a good deal of faith in the American people having much in the way of good sense anymore...

[PROGRESSIVE1]

3. It's just an opinion, that does not mean that they are going to vote....

for him!!! Sorry to say this, but Joe, you are a right wing HO and you must GO!!!!!!!!!

[CMT]

4. good for Dean

he has gone from 1% in last poll to 4% in this poll--progress moving up from eighth to sixth and statistically tied with Edwards and Kerry who have 5%. Edwards from a neigboring state and Kerry who has been courting the strong military vote in the state. Not bad for the man from Vermont.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

8. The only one to quadruple his support.

Right, Nic?

[UnapologeticLiberal]

16. This is true, but Dean should spend more time in SC

It is true that he has gone up 3 points and is one of the few candidates to have gained rather than lost support, but he needs to do better to prove that he can compete in the south...he has spent a lot of time in Iowa and New Hampshire and it is paying off in the polls...now hopefully he will be able to branch out to South Carolina and Arizona and other early primary states. I am worried about a repeat of 2000, when McCain crushed Bush in New Hampshire only to go down after South Carolina. Winning New Hampshire used to almost guarantee the nomination but not anymore...the last 2 presidents have lost the New Hampshire primary, and Dean will need to build up a strong base in the states that come after New Hampshire in order to go on to the nomination.

If by some miracle he wins Iowa and New Hampshire, he will knock out Kerry and Gephardt, which would certainly help, but he would still have Lieberman and Edwards and Graham to contend with, and that worries me a little because Lieberman has spent a lot of time working on the states that come after New Hampshire, and he could rise up out of nowhere after the other candidates compete for Iowa and New Hampshire, since he has already written off winning them.

[Nazgul35]

6. Again...

this is nothing more the name recognition. There is no question that seperates those informed voters from uninformed voters, which would be the most useful information.

What was the pierson's r hypothesis test for this poll? Can we make an inference from the sample to the population?

My three question poll:

1) Name the democratic candidates currently running for president of the unitd states. ( this will enable the researcher to categorize the level of knowledge each voter possesses).

By knowing which voters are informed, we would be able to test
and see if the results for uninformed voters is any better then
what nature would choose...

2) Adding undecided to your list, which candidate would you vote for if the primary were held today.

Gives a more accurate picture of the support base each candidate
possesses with voters at various levels of support...

3) What issue(s) is(are) most important to you in determining you choice for the democratic nominee...feel free to list as many issues as you feel are important. (provides a way for seeing which candidates are supported based upon which issues, and if any candidate is hitting more then one issue...)

allows for us to determine which issues are actual resonding
with democratic voters, and not the mostly uninformed that the
DLC tries to pass off as issues of importance for the next
election...

solidarity brothers and sisters.....

PS if this keeps up Nick, you're going to force me to open a thread on statistics....

:evilgrin:

[blm]

7. There has been little attention paid to the Dem candidates

here in SC. Name recognition is by far the greatest factor. If this was a poll of engaged DNC Democrats it would be a different story.

The real guage will be the midfall polls.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

9. Are they gonna have a primary?

I thought there were $$$$ issues.

[blm]

14. They'll pull it out.

I know there will be a large donation to the Dem party here from progressive members of mr. blm's family.

[corgigrrl]

10. SC might as well be Texas

I agree the that Joe is riding on the fumes of name recognition in a state where there prob. has been little face time with any of the candidates. John Edwards' doom seems pretty clear if he can't even galvanize his birth state.

But the bottom line is unless there is a massive A-A turnout in the state in the general, we Dems can probably kiss this state good bye. We need to worry more about swing states we can win, like Pennsylvania.

I know, I know, as a Dean supporter i have to say leave no state behind, but SC would be a long shot.

[blm]

13. Wait till the vets start protesting.

You'll see a whole new state within a year from now.

[Nicholas_J]

18. And the peirson r hypothesis test would have virtually no value in such

cases. In general this is more applicable to changing groups over time, than separate individual polls of differnt populations.And in general it makes the assumption of no outside influnces on the population, simply measuring populations and their placement over periods of time. (Again,indicating regression in the SAME populations, rather than changes in different populations) The idea that if you are staying at the same level you are regressing is counter- rational.

In political polling, simply asking questions, getting answers, and averaging the numbers you get is an EXTREMELY accurate way of figuring who is likely to vote for who. As a matter of fact yo can extend this idiotic name recogition concept all the way to election day.


Looking at multiple polls of multiple population by different people asking diofferent question, in different areas randomly is likely to get the best actual picture of what the general direction of the general poplation who in generally will be voting is generally, the best determinant of who is in which position.


Dean is not in first place, yet he has had the most opportunity to attack ALL of the other candidates numerous times. While NO one has attacked Dean until the last few days. Sorry, with ALL of the advantages Dean has had, campaigning since September of 2001, he is not in good position. At all.All it wil take is a few little bits of dirt out of Vermont, to destroy Deans campaign this time. MANY New Hampshre Dean supporters are rethinking their position, and the desire to NOT make the choice that wil lose is uppoermost in their minds.

It does not even matter if the polls are true. IF the polls show Dean as unelectable, the appearance of enelectability will begin to erode his campaign, as it looks more and more like public opinions of Bush makes it look possible that A DEMOCRAT COULD beat Bush. If that Democrat appears more likely to be Kerry than Dean, tant Kerry will get the nomination.

Dean tried this early on, He lied through his teeth about the October Resolution and his lies made the October Resolution seem to be somethin it wasnot to anti-war democrats.

THev apearence that Dean does not have the experience, and thatbthe voters do not have the confidence in his ability to beat Bush will be more than enough to end his campaign. WHen Deans experience very soo is comapred to the experience of the other cnadidates, this will thne errode Deans lead in popularity, in order to go for electabilty.

Deans own supporterd pull this crap all of the time... The Wisconsin Straw poll, salted with Dean supporters. And the lateest Iowa Mocl elections with as many Dean suporters in the county as the entire county of the population. Dean will not have the opposrtunity to create thesex appearances much longer.


In fact, I have been asked to become FORMALLY involved in the creation of the "DEAN DOSSIER" INfo about his actual record of opposing democrts, supporting republicans, and killing democratic drafted legislation over a ten years peoriod, to be used during the fall in debates with Dean. It feels good to be able to contribute against Dean.

[Nicholas_J]

15. Run your lessons, but include those who place polls about Dean in

your statistics lessons to all those who post polls indicative of Dean lead.

Or do you mean that THIS ZOGBY POLL IS TOTALLY INCORRECT:


Zogby International’s “Road to Boston” Series


New Nationwide Zogby Poll of Likely Democratic Primary Voters Shows Gephardt, Dean, Lieberman Tied for Lead;


69% Say Bush Re-Election Likely



Three Democratic presidential hopefuls share the lead in nationwide polling of likely voters in a primary election, according to results released by Zogby International. Missouri Congressman Richard Gephardt, former Vermont Governor Dr. Howard Dean, and Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman each polled 12% of the 504 likely voters surveyed July 16-17.

In similar nationwide polling by Zogby in March, Lieberman lead the pack with 18%, followed by Gephardt at 11% and Kerry at 9%. Kerry maintained his 9% in the new poll, slipping from 3rd to 4th. Dean jumps in the new poll from a 4th place tie to a 1st place tie. The margin of error for both polls is +/- 4.4%. Error margins are higher for sub-groups.

Other announced contenders are civil rights activist Rev. Al Sharpton (4%), North Carolina Senator John Edwards (3%), former Illinois Senator Carol Mosley Braun (2%), Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich (2%), and Florida Senator Bob Graham (1%).

So this means that you disagree and are willing to state that the information inthis poll is TOTALLY errorneous. Dean is NOT in the top tier and polling equally with the other candidates...

Is this your contention?

and then look at this full poll; and report what it indicates

http://www.unh.edu/survey-center/dem070703.pdf


ARG's latest poll says this"

Kerry and Dean Continue to Lead Democrats in New Hampshire


Massachusetts Senator John Kerry and former Vermont Governor Howard Dean continue to lead in ballot preference among likely Democratic primary voters in the New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Preference Primary according to the latest New Hampshire Poll. Kerry receives support from 25% of likely Democratic primary voters and is followed by Dean at 19%. Congressman Dick Gephardt, at 10%, is the only other potential Democratic candidate to receive double-digit support in the ballot preference.

These results are based on 600 completed telephone interviews among a random sample of registered Democrats and undeclared voters in New Hampshire saying they always vote or vote in most Democratic primary elections. The interviews were conducted July 21 through 24, 2003. The theoretical margin of error for the total sample of 600 is plus or minus 4 percentage points, 95% of the time, on questions where opinion is evenly split.

Joe Lieberman has lost five percentage points from the June survey and his current 5% ballot preference matches ballot preference for him in January.

Likely Democratic
primary voters July
2003 June
2003 May
2003 April
2003 Mar
2003 Feb
2003 Jan
2003

Joe Biden 1%
Carol Moseley Braun 1%
Wesley Clark 2
Howard Dean 19%
John Edwards 2%
Dick Gephardt 10%
Bob Graham 2%
John Kerry 25%
Dennis Kucinich 1%
Joe Lieberman 6%
Al Sharpton 1%
Undecided 30%


http://americanresearchgroup.com/nhpoll/dem/
but you can just go to their web site to get ALL of the information on their polling methods and statistical modeling they use.

I am not allowed to print FULL polls, as when I public complete information , Dean supporters hit alerts for "COPYRIGHT VIOLATION" they are sort of frightened when they see polls that state that Dean is ahead by a few points, but within the MoE. but shows that NO ONE polled beleives Dean can beat Bush.

Soryy, you ask several hundred people randomly if who threy thoink has a better chance of brating Bush, Dean or Kerry, and when 17 percent say Dean and 44 percent say Kerry, in New Hampshire, where tey are both fairly well known, one mst accept the likelihood, fewer people think Dean can win.

As Zogby himself states, No poll can predict anything, just indicate direction. And while Dena moves forward (and even this momentum can be argued, by your own arguments about the INVALIDITY of such polls)

But the indication of ALL polls is that Dean is not in the lead, that the lead keeps escaping him, and he stays behind Lieberman, Gephardt and Kerry. This a trend. And regardless of methodlolgy. it has a degree of validity. Dean is not becoming the super candidate his supporters beleive him to be.

Individual interviews indocate than Dean supporters are thinking of droppoing him, as the person interviewed is thinkinbg of electability.

Outside of statistics, which are a tool, common sens must be applied. And if very few of these polls indicates that anyone asked beleives that Dean can win, Dean cannot win.

You can brag about your degree, but the guys who take the polls and do so for a living, use te tools AND their years experience interpreting to come up with their final interpretation:

Poll: Kerry has N.H. edge: Dems see senator as `electable'

by David R. Guarino
Sunday, July 27, 2003








Vaulted into the top tier of Democratic presidential hopefuls by his tough, anti-war rhetoric, Howard Dean still can't convince New Hampshire voters he can beat President Bush, a new Boston Sunday Herald poll shows.


Democratic primary voters in the Herald poll put Dean, the former Vermont governor, and U.S. Sen. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts in a deadlocked race for the first-in-the-nation primary - set for six months from today.

Voters say Kerry, boosted by strong foreign-policy credentials, is far better equipped to reclaim the White House, the poll shows.

``Although the Dean message is a popular one, Kerry is perceived as having more experience in foreign policy and is seen as more electable,'' said Herald pollster R. Kelly Myers.

Forty-four percent of voters say Kerry is more electable than Dean - only 17 percent say Dean has a better shot against Bush, the poll found.

Dean, while surging nationally, has had to battle a nagging sense among Democrats that he is too liberal, poorly funded or lacks the stature to take on Bush in the general election.

http://www2.bostonherald.com/news/local_regional/poll07272003.htm

Not me who is making the comments, but guys with a shit load more experience than you at doing this.

They do political polling for a living. They take both their political experience and their statistical methods together.

And that is the only way to see statistics workin the real world.
And in the real world the statistics work out to Dean havinfg t5o work uup a sweat to stay atbthe top of the bottom.

[Nicholas_J]

17. So you mean that if you ask me

Who I support, and I say Kerry, and If you ask me who I think has the best chance of beating Bush, Dean or Kerry, and I say Kerry, and then you randomly 600 people and 17 percent say Dean and 44 percent say Kerry, that this information is totally invalid. AND it means that more people think Dean can pull it off.

Thats what thes polls are asking, they are doing so from telehone lists of known democratic voters, and they are asking the questions randomly.

SO such data has NO value whatsoever according to your concepts of statistics?

People like gallop and American research have probably been in the business for longer than you have been alive. and likely have their methods downcfairly well. If not no one would be paying them for their services. Wonderful thing about our capitalistic society/ Businesses that do not produce, tend not to get repeat business.

For all of your BULLSHIT about statistics lessons, I am willing to lay miney on the fact that these pollsters are FAR more prepared to perform the polls and that they are likely far more accurate than anythig that you can think of or they would not be MULTI-BILLION dollar corporations. It sort of works that way. People just doent sell out millions to pollsters and then find that the data just was not relevant.

So go and check each pollsters web site, check on their methodology.

I know you would prefer thecampaign of lies that Dean is engaged in, but eventually, his records will result in changes in these numbers.
No ,atter ho accurate you beleive they are.

Again, even the polls with the highest MoE's indicate one thing. That a lot more people support the DLC and DLC candidates than support Dean. Add up all of the numbers, even if simply of indivuduals and out of 100 people in all of the polls, Dean can barely get 10 or 11 people who will admit they support him, and the DLC gets 64 people. That in itself is significant.
Dean was certainly worried shitless in 2000 when polls showed he would not win the gubernatorial elections. SO polls like this do make a difference to the candidates. Regardless. Dean is still nowhere, and it has taken him 2 years to be again at the bottom of a bunch of candidates who have been campaigning for a quater of the time he, has.

Once the other canduidates actuallt start campaigning, thne we wil see how Dean does. I am going to be amused at how he does at the AFL-CIO debates tonight.

Dean is unable to respond extemporaeously. HE needs a script. He KNOWS next to nothing. ANd If he has to face Kerry alopne in a debate on foreign affairs he will be ripped to pieces.

[Nazgul35]

19. whew...touched a nerve there....

You seem to be very good at assuming facts not in evidence...and you don't take alot of time reading what everybody else posts....

I think that what is wrong is the assumptions you draw from polls in support of YOUR ASSUMPTIONS that do not fit the data collected....

where even to begin....perhaps your closest post...what I said..and my example poll shows is just how informed the respondent is about the choices...so if I ask you who are the democratic candidates running and you say John Kerry....and that's it, I classify you as being poorly informed about the race...and any response you gave after that would be classified as a poorly informed respondent....

I would not offer you any more choices in the second question...because I would be providing you with information that you did not posses and could possibly push your answer....

As far as the appropriate tests to be run....you must alway check to see if the characteristics found in the sample you drew (which must be statsitically significant) is also present in the population you are examining....

And since you said you took 6 courses in what I would call methods theory...you should know that the connection between:

THEORY ----> MODEL ----> STATISTICS

is actually measuring what you think you are measuring....

So, if the people you are polling are uninformed about who the candidates are and what issues they are espousing...and then provide them with a list of names...you are doing nothing more then name recognition.....

And finally (though i'm not too sure I got it all in that blitz posting!), no I DO NOT PUT ANYTHING INTO POLLS THAT SHOW HOWARD DEAN AHEAD....as this measures nothing more then growing name recognition for all the candidates...and this will be uneven across the country as the candidates are being exposed at different rates...and WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT ERROR TERMS THAT ARE NOT DISTRIBUTED NORMALLY???!!!

But since you read fast...and often ignore...i mean miss what people say...i'll post the above paragraph four more times...to be sure you read it!!!

And finally (though i'm not too sure I got it all in that blitz posting!), no I DO NOT PUT ANYTHING INTO POLLS THAT SHOW HOWARD DEAN AHEAD....as this measures nothing more then growing name recognition for all the candidates...and this will be uneven across the country as the candidates are being exposed at different rates...and WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT ERROR TERMS THAT ARE NOT DISTRIBUTED NORMALLY???!!!

And finally (though i'm not too sure I got it all in that blitz posting!), no I DO NOT PUT ANYTHING INTO POLLS THAT SHOW HOWARD DEAN AHEAD....as this measures nothing more then growing name recognition for all the candidates...and this will be uneven across the country as the candidates are being exposed at different rates...and WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT ERROR TERMS THAT ARE NOT DISTRIBUTED NORMALLY???!!!

And finally (though i'm not too sure I got it all in that blitz posting!), no I DO NOT PUT ANYTHING INTO POLLS THAT SHOW HOWARD DEAN AHEAD....as this measures nothing more then growing name recognition for all the candidates...and this will be uneven across the country as the candidates are being exposed at different rates...and WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT ERROR TERMS THAT ARE NOT DISTRIBUTED NORMALLY???!!!

And finally (though i'm not too sure I got it all in that blitz posting!), no I DO NOT PUT ANYTHING INTO POLLS THAT SHOW HOWARD DEAN AHEAD....as this measures nothing more then growing name recognition for all the candidates...and this will be uneven across the country as the candidates are being exposed at different rates...and WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT ERROR TERMS THAT ARE NOT DISTRIBUTED NORMALLY???!!!

did ya get it....so your assumptions about all Dean supporters rahrahing when the polls are positive and poopooing when they are negative is false where I am concerned...

Oh yeah....so by your logic about how long these polling agencies have been in business...since the repugs have had 5 of the last 7 presidents....our candidates should just shut up cause they've been in the president bizz alot longer then we have...

where do you think those polling agencies learned those techniques? And I believe you said nonprofit....could some of that be academic $$$? Look at the bottom of most polls, and you'll see U.of Mich at the bottom...

[Nicholas_J]

12. I hope you include

YOu statistics lessons to all those who post polls indicative of Dean lead.

Or do you mean tat THIS ZOGBY POLL IS DEAD INCORRECT:


Zogby International’s “Road to Boston” Series


New Nationwide Zogby Poll of Likely Democratic Primary Voters Shows Gephardt, Dean, Lieberman Tied for Lead;


69% Say Bush Re-Election Likely



Three Democratic presidential hopefuls share the lead in nationwide polling of likely voters in a primary election, according to results released by Zogby International. Missouri Congressman Richard Gephardt, former Vermont Governor Dr. Howard Dean, and Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman each polled 12% of the 504 likely voters surveyed July 16-17.

In similar nationwide polling by Zogby in March, Lieberman lead the pack with 18%, followed by Gephardt at 11% and Kerry at 9%. Kerry maintained his 9% in the new poll, slipping from 3rd to 4th. Dean jumps in the new poll from a 4th place tie to a 1st place tie. The margin of error for both polls is +/- 4.4%. Error margins are higher for sub-groups.

Other announced contenders are civil rights activist Rev. Al Sharpton (4%), North Carolina Senator John Edwards (3%), former Illinois Senator Carol Mosley Braun (2%), Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich (2%), and Florida Senator Bob Graham (1%).

So this means that you disagree and are willing to state that the information inthis poll is TOTALLY errorneous. Dean is NOT in the top tier and polling equally with the other candidates...

Is this your contention?