Recent polls

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Economist - Tie
ARG - Tie
Zogby - Bush +2
Rasmussen - Bush +4
Time - Bush +11

Hmmm, one of these doesn't belong.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Economist - Tie
ARG - Tie
Zogby - Bush +2
Rasmussen - Bush +4
Time - Bush +11

Hmmm, one of these doesn't belong.

Were all of these post-RNC?

Let's wait until we have several polls conducted entirely after Bush's speech.  Then we'll have a much better picture of what's going on.

Time could be a harbinger of things to come.  It could also be anomaly.  Only time (*g*) will tell.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Economist - Tie
ARG - Tie
Zogby - Bush +2
Rasmussen - Bush +4
Time - Bush +11

Hmmm, one of these doesn't belong.

Were all of these post-RNC?

Let's wait until we have several polls conducted entirely after Bush's speech.  Then we'll have a much better picture of what's going on.

Time could be a harbinger of things to come.  It could also be anomaly.  Only time (*g*) will tell.

I don't think any post-RNC polls are out. All of these polls were based on polling during the convention.

[Bogart]

Economist - Tie
ARG - Tie
Zogby - Bush +2
Rasmussen - Bush +4
Time - Bush +11

Hmmm, one of these doesn't belong.

Yeah, probably a fluke. That's to much.

[The Vorlon]

Economist - Tie
ARG - Tie
Zogby - Bush +2
Rasmussen - Bush +4
Time - Bush +11

Hmmm, one of these doesn't belong.

Economist = Internet based => highly suspect
ARG = Wretched almost painfully bad sample design and consistently pro Kerry this year
Zogby - Systematic anti-Bush bias and comically bad record for accuracy.

Rasmussen - weighted by party ID - damps out swings...

Personally, I don't believe the Bush +11 either.... FWIIW....

But other than the Bot Poll which I sorta-maybe trust, the rest of the lot you quote are also pretty hopeless...

Let's wait for the "real" polls..

We'll have a Gallup, and an Opinion Dymanics this weekend, an ABC on Monday, and I think a TIPP by Mid week.

For comedy relief I think we also get a new CBS poll tonight.

Up till now we have two junk polls, a bot-track and an unknown

We have no RELIABLE information on the race from these 4 polls.

Everybody on both sides, sit down, take a deep breath, and pop a valium.

Repeat after me...

Wait for Gallup, TIPP, Ipsos, OD, Harris and the folks who know what they are actually doing...

Bush might be up 11, or not...

We just don't know yet

[HennessyXO]

these polls with sample pools of 500-1000 are not accurate.  Kerry will win because all the online polls with sampling errors of thousands show Kerry ahead.  End of discussion.

[The Vorlon]

these polls with sample pools of 500-1000 are not accurate.  Kerry will win because all the online polls with sampling errors of thousands show Kerry ahead.  End of discussion.

Your right.  I agree.

Kerry wins let's all go home

[CARLHAYDEN]

I think HennessyXO has had a few too many.

[dazzleman]

these polls with sample pools of 500-1000 are not accurate.  Kerry will win because all the online polls with sampling errors of thousands show Kerry ahead.  End of discussion.

Not necessarily true.  What matters is that the people answering the polls represent a true representative cross-section of the VOTING public.

This is getting harder to pull off.  A poll on a certain website will most likely not be representative of the voting population, for a number of reasons.  First, if the website has a certain political orientation, that will most definitely skew the results.  Second, there is no indication of how likely the respondents are to actually vote.  Then there's the issue of computer owners/internet users only having access to the poll.

A smaller sampling, with greater randomness, would be more accurate than online polls.  I was shocked at the AOL straw poll, which had George W. Bush with 64% nationally, and 58% in Connecticut.  Likewise, on the MSNBC poll, Kerry had 70%.  Clearly, these polls can't be very accurate.

[MODU]

Online polls = bad

I trust them as well as I trust my second (ex) g/f.