ABC Poll, Nov 1-4: support for Dems up among military vets?

[MH1]

ABC poll slows slight improvement for Dems among military veterans since last poll in October (poll conducted Nov 1 - 4). The analysis calls it "essentially the same" yet Dem support is 2 points higher and Rep support is the same, meaning (ignoring MoE) that some undecideds moved to Dem. Now, they may be saying "essentially the same" because 2 points is within MoE, but what would they have said if it went the other way?

Another question is whether the Democrats were hurt by a comment last week by Sen. John Kerry that some took as disrespectful to veterans. In this poll military veterans split 42-51 percent (Dem.-Rep.) for House; in an early October ABC/Post poll, it was essentially the same, 40-51 percent.

... the Democrats don't show direct damage from the Kerry remark ...

However, in the discussion of this poll at dailykos, this point seems to have been missed. I got a comment about "Q" that I don't understand. I don't see why, if the analyst is comparing the two polls, the polls aren't comparable.

On a side note, I give the writer props for neutral phrasing: "comment" and "some took as..." rather than the more biased phrasing most writers have been using. JMHO on that one, though.

OTOH, on reflection the damage would not have been from the remark, but from the flap surrounding it, which was given air by Dems who jumped on the RW bandwagon instead of standing up for the truth. So take props away from the writer for referencing the "comment" not the flap.

I also posted this at the Kerry blog: http://blog.johnkerry.com/2006/11/call_for_change_gotv_rock_the_1.html#comment-4221

[Mass]

1. The point is that the question is broader than just the veteran.

This poll (and others) seem to show that the GOP is getting a little bit stronger. As the poster says, this has nothing to do with Kerry. The movement started earlier.

(I think that the point that needs to be made is that, while the comment itself did no damage, the fact that the media focused on that for several days rather than talking of other issues and that the Dems let them do that rather than going on cablenews and counterattack could be a small problem, but whose fault is it?).

[MH1]

2. Well, the poster also made reference to

"the artificial Kerry spike", which I took in context to mean there was SOME kind of spike - but I don't see it in those numbers.

[Mass]

3. These are not his comments, buts somebody else.

As I noted, some senate polls show much closer races than expected (RI, MT, ...). This is what "the otherrasmussen" is calling the artificial Kerry spike. (Who knows where this come from in reality?).

[sandnsea]

8. Good thing they didn't get more air then

They actually took the oxygen out of their own airwaves by focusing on John Kerry and Iraq. They were supposed to be talking about the economy all week.

Anyway, the Tester race is about what it's been for several weeks if you look at SurveyUSA running poll. There's been a spread that varies between 5 and 10, depending. But Tester's ahead and has even broken 51% in a couple polls. That race is over, barring a last minute scandal. The only people who stand to benefit from the line that it's not over are pollsters and last minute media buys. The media pays the pollsters for the use of their polls from money campaigns spend on advertising. I really don't trust all these 50/50 horse races. People are too easily manipulated, these elections are becoming self-fulfilling prophecies of the media, imo.

[karynnj]

4. His point is that the impact on the entire population

may be more negative then the effect on the vets. This is possible but in reality it will be tough to get real accurate information. What is clear is that the numbers polled on Oct 31 and Nov 1 were actually better than on Sunday Oct 29, though that was the earlier trend.

Your poll at minimum shows that the vets didn't turn against the Democrats - that is the truth from this study. It's true that the improvement is insignificant, but it does show that the vets did not move AWAY from the Democrats. That is good.

[beachmom]

5. All interesting, but the only poll that really matters is the one

on Tuesday. If we do very well, then it is for sure that no damage was done. However, if we do okay, but not quite as well as expected, then Kerry will be blamed, whether it was his fault or not. However, a Ford loss will not be blamed on Kerry, because the downward trend had already occurred.

[Inuca]

6. Exactly! n/t

[MH1]

7. I disagree, slightly

However, if we do okay, but not quite as well as expected, then Kerry will be blamed, whether it was his fault or not.

This is why I am paying attention to these polls. So far I have seen several - 3 national, including this ABC poll, and 1 in PA - that show no impact to Dems from the Kerry smear.

If after the election people try to say that Dems didn't do as well as they should have, here's a couple answers:

1) no indication by polls that there was any effect at all during the period of press coverage of the smear

2) If it played against Dems, it is because too many high-profile Dems went with the RW smear machine and said Kerry did something wrong - when he didn't. Blame Hillary et al, not Kerry.

Of course some will put forth bullshit arguments anyway, but we will just debunk the bullshit.

[Mass]

9. Add the PewPoll in it..

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=295

Not surprisingly, the Republicans have succeeded remobilizing some of their supporters.

I love the question concerning Kerry. 18 % of independants say that it raises serious doubt about voting for a Democrat. I wonder how many of these 18 % would have even thought voting for a Dem?

[politicasista]

10. Good question.

I hope that isn't the case.

[Mass]

12. It was sarcasm. There is a part of these independants who are to the right

of the GOP and would never vote Democrat anyway, or simply would not vote.

Clearly, this number shows that there were very little, if any damage made.

[politicasista]

13. Oh, I understand now

They probably lean more GOP anyway. :hi:

[karynnj]

11. I'm shocked it's only 18%

The idependents run the gammut of very liberal to very conservative - they simply don't want to disclose their affiliation or don't have one. In my town, many of those the voting records identify as Independent said they were Republican. This is really an impossible question to ask to get a real answer.