On Sat, 25 Sep 2004, Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
>> That suggests the uncomfortable possibility that observed changes in
>> the sentiments of "likely voters" represent not actual changes in voter
>> sentiment, but rather changes in the composition of likely voter
>> samples as political enthusiasm waxes and wanes among the different
>> parties' supporters.
>
> In other words, John Kerry's poor showings in recent polls are indicative of
> lack of political enthusiasm among partisans who constitute the base of the
> Democratic Party.
Who are still going to vote for him. Kerry has more vigorous support from the left wing than any Democratic presidential candidate since FDR. I'm not saying he deserves it. I'm saying he can count on it. He doesn't need to mobilize his base. Bush is doing it for him with every gesture he makes to his own base.
> If even partisan supporters of the Democratic Party can't get
> enthusiastic about Kerry, it is unlikely that anyone else is.
This willfully ignores the central dynamic of all campaigns: that what wows the wing alienates the centrists and vice versa.
This does however suggest an original explanation for why the LV polls are so much worse than the RV polls and (and why this is esp. true with Gallup): because when used month before the eleciton, likelihood becomes a direct function of confidence, and Kerry supporters are an extremely skittish bunch who are absurdly easy to spook into depression and despair. We're all sure disaster looms even when we're ahead; Repugs are sure they'll win even when they're behind.
> Try as Ruy Teixeira might to find a positive spin on the polls, there is
> no denying that Kerry is a lackluster candidate.
I don't think anyone would deny that. He literally makes Gore look charismatic.
But he has a 20 year reputation for finishing strong. And he looks like he's picking up a bit.
Michael