I keep making the mistake of going to electoral-vote.com...

[terrya]

Today, it's Bush 285 Kerry 257 over there.

And...it just doesn't compute. Am I mistaken about this? Reassure me, please.

I can feel the tide shifting towards Kerry.

[Bronco69]

1. I'm with ya Terry

I can feel the tide shifting too, but I swear I don't understand why the media and others have these two running neck and neck. I think somebody somewhere is making sh*t up! :-)

[NDFan]

2. Don't visit that site unless

Unless you believe GOP polling firms like Strategic Vision are credible.

As for Zogby... his nationwide polling did well in 1996 and 2000, but his state polls are notoriously unreliable.

[texasmom]

3. It shifts dramatically

every day, and most of the states that are "barely" one candidate are only a one or two point difference, well within the margin of error for the poll, and not counting new/registered voters. They're relying on "likely" voters when this election will be very different.

They sway a lot everyday. Don't worry.

[iconoclastic cat]

4. Ick. Me too.

I don't buy it at all.

[RafterMan]

5. You're not mistaken

E-V.com are.

The Dems have picked up 15-20 points in the newspapaer endorsements since 2000. Maybe these don't shape opinion, but surely they must at least reflect it. You know this is true.

Gore won the popular vote in 2000 -- could Kerry's numbers be any weaker after 4 years of this yokel? The late polls had Gore trailing by 8 points four years ago. If they poll the race as even now, you do the math.

With only a few days left, there's no way to win the long-standing arguments. Just focus on GOTV and we'll get those Bush bastards.

[Florida_Geek]

6. It is just a Rove site pushing rove polling companies

but trying to sound "fair and balance" just like Fox. I do not buy Fox's F&B nor that's sites F&B.

[lady raven]

7. Ah... BUT

If you go to

http://www.electoral-vote.com/pred/

and look at the predicted final result, it looks much better :-)

[terrya]

11. Thank you! That looks much, much better,

:-)

[Ganja Ninja]

8. I don't put much faith in any of the polls.

Unless it's run buy the Democratic Party I would discount all of them. If you don't know who's taking the poll you can't be sure of their motives or agenda. If the party takes a poll there's an incentive to be accurate in order to pinpoint their efforts. It would be counterproductive to lie to themselves. Of course that information would most likely be kept to themselves as well.

[flygal]

9. They aren't factoring in the no. of people actually voting this year

In my county early voting is more than double. I think the huge turnout is going to be very important and make these polls obsolete.

[Say_What]

14. Exactly right. I heard or read that they're expecting more

people to vote than they've seen since WWII!! Not only do I feel the polls are rigged, but this year there's NO predicting anything. Also, we have the Colorado electoral vote thing that Coloradans are voting on at the same time that could really throw a monkey wrench into a close race. I'm hoping for a BIG WIN!

:bounce:

[billyoc]

10. If you *must* go there

be sure to click on the "predicted final results"

[Longhorn]

12. I don't know where you're getting those results for today.

When I go there, I get Kerry 260, Bush* 254, with Michigan and Iowa tied (October 28.)

If you scroll down, the Votemaster always has an explanation of what's going on and he's made it clear when he doesn't believe certain results. Even "accurate" polls fluctuate within the margin of error. I can handle it -- I know that none of these polls are reflecting first-time voters, turnout, those who have only cell phones or no phones at all, etc.

[LonghornJack]

13. Does Anyone Remember Carville's Polling Outfit?

James Carville and another prominent Democratic figure established a polling organization that has done some very accurate polling. I seem to remember the name of the outfit sounding like "Democracy Now" or something along those lines.

Their polling has been receiving some good reviews....and their numbers have been showing good news for Kerry-Edwards.

Does anyone recall that organization's name?

Thanks.

LHJ

[Mugsy]

15. Site swings wildly daily w/o reason. Ignore.

I stopped visiting "electoral-vote.com" weeks ago after the following:

It was just before the debates and e-v.com showed Kerry with a huge 30 point electoral vote lead. I quickly e-mailed the link to my friends that night.

The next day I received a number of puzzeled replies why I was so thrilled over a huge Bush lead, so I checked it out. Over night, Pennsylvania has switched from "leans Kerry" to "leans Bush" for absolutely no apparent reason. Nothing had happened over-night (or even in the past week) to account for it, but by subtracting PA's 21 votes from Kerry and giving those 21 votes to Bush caused and instant 42-point swing in the results.

I have NO clue what e-v uses as the basis to fluctate the results on a *daily* basis, as they do not do their own polls. And if they are "averaging" polls from other sources, since every source does not do a new poll every single day, e-v can not possibly be relying on the same sources for its data every day.

So ignore them. They have to be using one of the most stupid polling methods available for their results.

*****
***** The "Bush in 30 Seconds" Archive: www.bi30archive.org
***** The largest collection of MoveOn.org contest ads on the web.
***** Home of THE BUSH SPLIT-SCREEN 9/11 VIDEO!
*****

[lapislzi]

16. It's an exercise in masochism

I can't help peeking at it, but I'm always sorry after I do. I can't even call it a guilty pleasure because it's far from a pleasure. More like a guilty self-flagellating ritual.

Ugh, now I have to go shower.