Zogby for Halloween
Good news for the President: John Kerry's brief one-point lead has turned out not to be a trend. The race is tied again at 48%.
I wouldn't get too worried about Kerry's leads in those battleground states in Zogby's poll, either. The critical states are to all intents and purposes toss-ups, and Kerry's lead in, say, Florida isn't reflected in other tracking polls.
Monday's Zogby may, if past cycles are any indication, give us something of an idea how the election is going to go- but only if one candidate or the other leads by multiple points. Right now, I wouldn't bet on it. As things now stand, this election is looking very much like a toss-up, and who that is good news for depends on which pollster or pundit you ask.
In wartime, undecideds usually decide not to switch horses in midstream. Otherwise, they tend to vote against the incumbent- unless the challenger is at least as much "the issue" as the incumbent is. The circumstances of this campaign are such a hodge-podge of the above circumstances that I don't think anybody is really too sure about any theory right now.
It looks, in any case, like my prediction of a week or two ago is going to be wrong. Here we are on the Sunday evening before the election, and we don't know, after all, who is going to win. One thing is sure: whatever template the endgame of this campaign follows, it doesn't appear that it will be the one favored by most Democratic pundits: 1980.
Hopefully, we'll know by noon Wednesday- if the Democrats don't get "pre-emptive," to use the DNC's phrase, and try to use phony stories about Republicans disenfranchising voters as a way to overturn the results of the election, like they did in Florida four years ago.
I wouldn't get too worried about Kerry's leads in those battleground states in Zogby's poll, either. The critical states are to all intents and purposes toss-ups, and Kerry's lead in, say, Florida isn't reflected in other tracking polls.
Monday's Zogby may, if past cycles are any indication, give us something of an idea how the election is going to go- but only if one candidate or the other leads by multiple points. Right now, I wouldn't bet on it. As things now stand, this election is looking very much like a toss-up, and who that is good news for depends on which pollster or pundit you ask.
In wartime, undecideds usually decide not to switch horses in midstream. Otherwise, they tend to vote against the incumbent- unless the challenger is at least as much "the issue" as the incumbent is. The circumstances of this campaign are such a hodge-podge of the above circumstances that I don't think anybody is really too sure about any theory right now.
It looks, in any case, like my prediction of a week or two ago is going to be wrong. Here we are on the Sunday evening before the election, and we don't know, after all, who is going to win. One thing is sure: whatever template the endgame of this campaign follows, it doesn't appear that it will be the one favored by most Democratic pundits: 1980.
Hopefully, we'll know by noon Wednesday- if the Democrats don't get "pre-emptive," to use the DNC's phrase, and try to use phony stories about Republicans disenfranchising voters as a way to overturn the results of the election, like they did in Florida four years ago.
Comments