>>That could account for the disparity. Or, it could mean that they didn't
>>register as Democrats.
>
>I'm registered independent, but I'm voting for Big John. Why do the
>surveys assume everybody is a donkey or an elephant? I'll bet a majority
>of registered independents who vote will go for Big John rather than
>Little Shrub.
They don't. We were discussing why some of the polls are finding more republicans in their samples than they "should be" were we going by the Party ID composition of the last few elections. There should be _more_ demlicants in a random sample, not consistently more replicants if you base it on that. But that's not happening with some of the polls and it's skewing the results.
BTW, here's the interesting stuff from my replicant party insider friend. it was written three months ago:
i don't think florida is really in play (yet). the cuban american vote has been vocal about being betrayed, but still polls supportive of bush. the i-4 corridor (where you live) has seen a host of gop activity and florida is still the preferred location of all those lobbyists that will "volunteer" (hey, tom delay still calls it that in his threatening letters, so why shouldn't i?). plus i think the bush white house has learned to organize itself around the leadership of jeb bush.
there will be one way to tell how florida *may* vote in november, and that is the september primary. if betty castor wins the dem senate nod, and bill mccollum wins the gop nod, then bush may have more trouble, but that reasoning is (to my thinking) highly speculative. florida hasn't (yet) been as responsive to kerry's vietnam veterans as other states (like ohio) have. and i don't know that picking edwards helps kerry in florida, although it may help the dem senate candidate. it will certainly boost the prospects of democratic senate candidates in north carolina, louisiana and perhaps -- perhaps -- south carolina. i think georgia is a lost cause for democrats for a very long time (we were way organized down there in 2002).
the one thing that you won't see where you live, but may hear about elsewhere, is that the small, rural towns that have tended to be republican for ages (and send their boys into the military) are trending away from the gop. every single funeral in a small town becomes this giant tragedy instead of a celebration of patriotism. i started to see this (and reported it here) in minnesota and south dakota in 2002. we hadn't even attacked iraq yet, and republicans in rural areas were already uneasy (in 2002). they wanted to trust the president, but now even they are beginning to feel betrayed. i think iowa is a goner for bush, and i don't think the president has a prayer in wisconsin or minnesota -- where the suburbs (once heavily republican) are turning blue.
i still don't think the president loses ohio (yet), because he is very organized there, and democrats are not. has kerry even named a campaign team for ohio yet? and while missouri is kerry's top target, it's hard for me to see how he wins there, either. i agree that the race is bush's to lose (i've always believed that), but i am stunned that he seems so eager to lose it!
but this should be an interesting election year. the electorate remains closely divided (only the rather curious polling of faux news shows bush in the lead), and undecideds always break for the challenger. but you won't see the standard convention bump because there are so few undecideds this year! but i think if kerry starts to poll over 50% consistently, you will see a lot of nervousness in gop ranks. they are already watching the president's campaign like a hawk, and some gop candidates have even asked that the president *not* make the standard commercials for them!
"We're in a fucking stagmire."
--Little Carmine, 'The Sopranos'