Democracy Corps (D) releases one-day polling data....

[Sam Spade]

http://www.democracycorps.com/reports/surveys/Democracy_Corps_September_30_2004_1st_Debate_Survey.pdf

This poll was conducted in somewhat the same way ABC's poll was.  They talked to people both before and afterwards and recorded their responses.

Baseline numbers from what they say:

45% say Kerry won the debate, 32% say Bush, 17% say neither, 6% say both.

Kerry improved himself greatly with the voters in terms of personal characteristics and leadership qualities.  Ironically, Bush slightly gained, or stayed even in most of these categories also.

They also showed gains in terms of how Kerry would handle homeland security and terrorism, but not much in terms of Iraq or foreign policy.

Overall, the President's JA went up during after the debate from 51% to 52%.  Also amusingly, the right track-wrong track numbers went from -13 to -7 post-debate (I can't figure that one out)

The horserace numbers looked this way.

Before debate:  Bush 50, Kerry 46 (with leaners)
After debate:  Bush 50, Kerry 48 (with leaners)

This is Dem Corps, run by Stanley Greenberg and James Carville (who both work with the Kerry campaign), fwiw, so as I always say "buyer beware", but the conclusions don't look too ridiculous.

The question is, will this minor bump solidify for Kerry, or will it just be temporary.

[AuH2O]

This leans D, so it looks reasonable if you subtract a bit from Kerry.

[The Vorlon]

all changes well within MOE

6 %gain in "right track/wrong track was a surprise to me.

Kerry gained 2% - seems sane to me

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

I saw this poll in the hotline.  The Party ID was 44/44/11 if anyone was wondering.

[A18]

What was the other 1%? Greens? Libertarians? Likely dead voters?

[Sam Spade]

I said I thought it was reasonable and it feels reasonable to me also.  

I wouldn't be surprised if they spiced up the numbers a little also, but not enough for me to notice anything that doesn't look insane.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

What was the other 1%? Greens? Libertarians? Likely dead voters?

Probably just lost in the rounding.

[zachman]

The strange thing about the media coverage of the debate is that the media was slow to call Kerry the winner last night, but now the media realizes that Kerry won big. The upward trend will continue.

[A18]

The weird thing is that anyone actually thinks Kerry won big.

Of course the liberal media's going to play up his performance.

[freedomburns]

The media is not liberal.  The media are controlled by a handful of corporations with very conservative values.  And Kerry won big.  He totally kicked Bush's fanny.

[shankbear]

Kerry is an Internationalist bum who would sell his soul to Paris, Moscow and Bonn.  He was technically the debate winner but his head exhibited that extreme vacuum of Liberalism..  No substance all Paris high fashion.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Kerry is an Internationalist bum who would sell his soul to Paris, Moscow and Bonn.  He was technically the debate winner but his head exhibited that extreme vacuum of Liberalism..  No substance all Paris high fashion.

Kerry will defend this country no matter whta France says. And he's no liberal.

[shankbear]

Fern, look at Kerry's so-called record.  He has been a defense sellout.  Voted to gut the very programs that our troops use.  Voted to cut funds that would provide protection for our troops in Iraq.  Wants to ask the freakin world's permission to address grave world dangers.  What the hell is a GLOBAL TEST?  That is groveling to the UN, the EU and all the other wimps to get their permission.  The terrorists of this world truly want to kill you, and me and Kerry and Bush and all freedom loving people.  They don't give a crap about your party affiliation or color or even your religion.  Hell, they are killing more Muslims now than we have.  Get a grip fern, Kerry is in it for Kerry, not for protecting America.  His record speaks louder than his debate skills.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Fern, look at Kerry's so-called record.  He has been a defense sellout.  Voted to gut the very programs that our troops use.  Voted to cut funds that would provide protection for our troops in Iraq.  Wants to ask the freakin world's permission to address grave world dangers.  What the hell is a GLOBAL TEST?  That is groveling to the UN, the EU and all the other wimps to get their permission.  The terrorists of this world truly want to kill you, and me and Kerry and Bush and all freedom loving people.  They don't give a crap about your party affiliation or color or even your religion.  Hell, they are killing more Muslims now than we have.  Get a grip fern, Kerry is in it for Kerry, not for protecting America.  His record speaks louder than his debate skills.

Kerry never said he'd ask for the world's permission if we truly had to defend ourselves.

[Smash255]

The weird thing is that anyone actually thinks Kerry won big.

Of course the liberal media's going to play up his performance.

yeah because Joe Scaraborough and Tucker Carlson are the most liberal people on earth....

[Umengus]

I think that the improvement of Bush is due to the fact that there is a little to much republicans in this poll:

last question: 2000 presidential vote

Gore: 42
Bush: 49
Nader: 3
someone else: 2
refused: 2


But more generally, it's a very good poll for Kerry in the internals. Consequently, I think that Kerry has solidified his dem base and has a touch with Indys. But it's just an idea...

[Sam Spade]

I know you may not like to hear it, but typically in polls, more people will say they voted for the guy who won last time than actually did.

I think it has to do somewhat with the "persuasion of authority" principle, but that's just a guess.  I'd have to find it in a book I read on the subject once.

[Reds4]

Sam's right on this one. Many of the Democracy Corps polls have shown Bush by 10 on how they voted in 2000, I don't know why people would do that, but they do.

[Smash255]

I know you may not like to hear it, but typically in polls, more people will say they voted for the guy who won last time than actually did.

I think it has to do somewhat with the "persuasion of authority" principle, but that's just a guess.  I'd have to find it in a book I read on the subject once.

The poll just had too many Republicans in it.  The vast majority of those who are against Bush can't stand him they are not going to say they voted for him in 2000 when they didn't especially when they can't stand him.

[Pollwatch99]

Rasmussen daily tracking is implying no significant change matching this poll result.  Rasmussen weighs to 2000 election turnout which is dem +3.

Poll was not republican skewed.  

[agcatter]

I could easily be wrong, but I believe Rasmussen weights it Dems +4.  39 - 35 - 26.

Like I said, I could be wrong on this one.

[Pollwatch99]

I could easily be wrong, but I believe Rasmussen weights it Dems +4.  39 - 35 - 26.

Like I said, I could be wrong on this one.

 

I think you're correct, I was working off memory and didn't want to over state the case

[The Vorlon]

I think that the improvement of Bush is due to the fact that there is a little to much republicans in this poll:

last question: 2000 presidential vote

Gore: 42
Bush: 49
Nader: 3
someone else: 2
refused: 2


But more generally, it's a very good poll for Kerry in the internals. Consequently, I think that Kerry has solidified his dem base and has a touch with Indys. But it's just an idea...

The question of whom people voted for in the last election is a question that, from a polling perspective, simple does not work.

Just two examples:

In the 2000 exit polls they asked people whom the voted for in 1996 - The poll said that (using Florida as an example because I happen to have the exit poll handy) the Clinton beat Dole by 16% in Florida, in actual fact, Clinton won Florida by only 6% in 1996.

In 1974, only 41% of people had actually voted for Nixon in 1992 according to the polls...

This is a question that just doesn't work.

The in incumbant is popular, more folks "voted" for him in polls than actually did, if the incumbant is not popular, less folks voted for him than actually did..

People responding to opinion polls have bad memories and are bad at projecting the future.

For example, if you ask people if they are "absolutely certain" they will vote, almost 80 are.. ... which explains why we typically have 80% turnout in elections...