Blue State Mason/Dixons

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Kerry doesn't need Iowa to win if he can take Wisconsin and Ohio, where he was only down one in M-D yesterday.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

BTW, shouldn't there be a couple more polls?

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

I don't know...I think the latest round of Mason-Dixons reflect a closer race than that.

Compare the latest M-D results with the 2000 election:

State     2000         M-D             Diff
FL         TIED          GOP +3      GOP +3
CO        GOP +8    GOP +6      Dem +2
MO       GOP +3     GOP +5      GOP +2
NV        GOP +4     GOP +10    GOP +6
NH        GOP +1     GOP +3      GOP +2
NC        GOP +13   GOP +8      Dem +5
OH        GOP +4     GOP +1      Dem +3
WV       GOP +6      GOP +5      Dem +1
IA          TIED          GOP +6      GOP +6
OR         TIED         Dem +1      Dem +1
PA         Dem +4     Dem +1     GOP +3
WI          TIED          TIED           TIED

Six show a gain for Republicans, five a gain for Democrats. 
The mean is a gain for Bush of less than 0.5%.
So I don't see at all how these show a Bush lead of 3-4% at all.  It's more likely that they show a popular vote tied, seeing as how Bush lost the popular vote by about 0.5% in 2000.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

I'm sorry.  I thought he was posting the 2000 M-D final poll figures and comparing them with the actual 2000 election results. 

Right...AuH20 claimed these polls showed a national Bush lead of 3-4%.  I'm showing that, on average, they show Bush doing only a fraction of 1% better than he did in 2000.

Nope, those are the current Mason Dixon polls. It would seem that he is trying to extrapolate an estimate on the current national popular vote from the Mason Dixon polls (since M-D doesn't do a national poll of course.)

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

I don't know...I think the latest round of Mason-Dixons reflect a closer race than that.

Compare the latest M-D results with the 2000 election:

State     2000         M-D             Diff
FL         TIED          GOP +3      GOP +3
CO        GOP +8    GOP +6      Dem +2
MO       GOP +3     GOP +5      GOP +2
NV        GOP +4     GOP +10    GOP +6
NH        GOP +1     GOP +3      GOP +2
NC        GOP +13   GOP +8      Dem +5
OH        GOP +4     GOP +1      Dem +3
WV       GOP +6      GOP +5      Dem +1
IA          TIED          GOP +6      GOP +6
OR         TIED         Dem +1      Dem +1
PA         Dem +4     Dem +1     GOP +3
WI          TIED          TIED           TIED

Six show a gain for Republicans, five a gain for Democrats. 
The mean is a gain for Bush of less than 0.5%.
So I don't see at all how these show a Bush lead of 3-4% at all.  It's more likely that they show a popular vote tied, seeing as how Bush lost the popular vote by about 0.5% in 2000.

You are not taking into account population size. 

GOP +3 in Florida means more than the Dem +3 in Ohio

You're right that this is very inexact.  Averaging GOP +3 in Florida and Dem +3 in Ohio may not result in a tie, but it certainly doesn't result in GOP +3 or 4 as AuH20 was claiming.   It's much closer to even than it is to such a wide margin.