The Debate

The first debate is in the books and what I thought before the debate held true:

1) The Democrats thought Kerry won.
2) The Republicans thought Bush won.
3) The swing voters were leaning to Kerry.

It is hard to believe, as a Democrat, to see how the GOP supporters thought that Bush won this debate. He looked tired, disinterested, frustrated, and bored. Karl Rove didn't provide him enough material to cover 90 minutes without repeating himself. But what this proves is that the key to this election, like all elections, is not the Republican or Democrat supporters but the swing voters those who really are not identifying with a particular candidate.

To this point I have believed that this election was a referendum on Bush. That, as long as the Democratic candidate didn't do anything harmful to his candidacy, he would win or lose based on whether the American People thought that Bush had done well enough with the War and the Economy. But a strange thing happened at that debate. I think, to a small degree, Kerry provided more reason for the American People to vote for him beyond simply being the vote against Bush. He looked Presidential and provided a different view. This may resonate with some swing voters, we shall see.

Kerry was far from perfect in this debate himself. While he was successful pushing back on Bush's attacks. I felt that he changed his position of whether we should go to War during the debate! I believe he is a pragmatic politician who does what he believes is right at the time and will change his position based on those beliefs. However, being labeled as a flip-flopper, should have pushed him to be very straight and understanable about his position. He was not. This was probably his biggest flaw during the debate. Additionally, if he had provided more details about his policies during the debate, he could have gone for the knockout punch. However, all in all, he did a good job.

Bush really suprised me. He looked much worse than I expected. I expected the Bush of 2000 who was crisp, very personable, and sure of himself on stage. He was none of those things, and like the election, Kerry didn't nescessarily win. Bush lost. My take is that the GOP was expecting a passive Kerry that was reminicient of Gore in 2000 and the less that Bush said, the better. I think having to actually defend his record and having direct attacks made on him was not expected by Mr. Rove or Mr. Bush. Bush also let his frustration visibly and verbally get to him. Finally, he stayed on message but sounded like a broken record that everyone knew was coming. I think this actually hurt him more than helped as it gave Kerry a chance to address all the concerns brought up previously by the GOP.

I am going to discuss the VP debate in much detail as it usually as little or no effect on the election. For proof, the Bentsen/Quayle debate was a knockout for the Democrats but didn't help the Democrats at all during the election. I will say that Edwards is that much better than Kerry, but Cheney is that much better than Bush. If you could get past all the posturing, this really could be a debate about the issues with two intelligent men.

The next Presidential Debate is Friday. Some are saying the focus on the Encomomy and Town Hall format will be in favor of Kerry. But I suspect that the Rovites will be working double time this week and Bush will be extremely prepared. The great thing about talking about the Economy is you can make the numbers say anything. So a soundbite ready Bush that has Economic numbers, getting intimate with the crowd, and lower expecations will make Bush a strong advesary. Kerry has his work cut out for him and, to be honest, I haven't seen enough of him to know if he is more like Gore or Clinton in these settings. My impression is about in the middle and maybe slightly leaning toward Gore. We'll see. Fortunately, the final debate is again in a setting that may favor Kerry.

24 September 2004 - Election Editorial

Don't get caught up in all the popular votes polls that are currently being conducted by all the various organizations out there. They are useful to a point, they will give you an idea how the Country may be leaning, but will not give you an idea as to the actual outcome of the election.

This is even more difficult to determine when you have the latest Gallup poll showing a 14 point Bush margin, but another showing only a two point margin. A lot of things are going to affect the results: actual days and times the polls are conducted, likely vs. registered voters, and methods of receiving data - among others. One of the better ideas, some of these analysts have had is to take all the latest polling data and take an average. However, that still may skew the results if polls outside a norm are also execepted. For example, the next largest margin after the Gallup poll is 8 by a CBS/Time Magazine Poll. If you take out the two extremes for each candidate, the following result is returned:

Bush: 48.6%
Kerry: 44.0%
Nader: 2%
Avg. Margin of error: 3.4%

(source of all polls: http://www.slate.com/id/2106527/)

The lead is slightly out of the Margin of Error in the favor of George W. Bush, which would give him a slight popular vote lead. Note, that most pollsters do not consider a lead 'solid' unless it is double the MOE.

Those who are Kerry supporters should not be dis-heartened. The most recent polls show Kerry starting to pull even with Bush in the popular vote contest. As we all know, the popular vote is going to be extremely close.

Now, looking at the State-by-State polls, it is even more confusing. Most polling conducted at the state level gives George W. Bush a significant advantage in States that are solidly for him. Kerry needs to bank on Swing States to deliver him the election. There are three types of Swing States in this election:

Up for Grabs but unless something drastic happens, Kerry will win: Pa, Or, Mi, Mn, Me, Ia, Nj
Up for Grabs but unless something drastic happens, Bush will win: Oh, Nv, Ar
Totally up for grabs: Fl, Nm

Some may argue that the leaning Kerry/Bush states are more up for grabs than indicated above. However, past election history and wide swing in polls seem to indicate otherwise. To show how crazy some of the polls are, look at two states that are considered 'in play':

Maryland
Virginia

These states are definitely going to Kerry and Bush, respectively and the polls are probably a bit misleading. It is true that there is a better chance for Kerry to lose one or two of his leaning states, which would change the entire complexion of the election. Bottomline, running various scenarios it is going to come down to Florida again. The candidate who can win Florida will win the election. The polls, leaning for awhile toward Bush are swinging slightly back to Kerry in Florida. However, it probably is Bush's to lose. Without Florida, Kerry could still win but cannot have any suprise upset in any states. What is more likely, without Florida it could very well be a 269/269 race - under a lot of scenarios. This would then go to the House to decide and most likely mean that Bush would be elected again.

Bottom line is that the race is entirely too close to call. Looking at the National Polls is not going to give you an indication as to who is doing better. The best indicator is to review the Electoral Map, that typically has Bush ahead. However, concentrate on Florida, New Mexico, and Pennsylvania. Kerry MUST win Pennsylvania and probably needs Florida. Bush is slightly in the driver's seat but there is a long way to go.

(Paul Zeitlin is a registered Democrat, however he is trying to present an unbiased view as to how the election will turn-out).