"Dr. Evil" Karl Rove gives interview and election analysis

[Sam Spade]

Interesting article in today's Washington Times of an interview with Karl Rove.

http://washingtontimes.com/national/20040923-122118-6902r.htm

Some notes:

[snippet]President Bush expects to help Republicans gain up to four Senate seats and seven House seats in November and already is running Sen. John Kerry out of states that had been considered battlegrounds, White House political strategist Karl Rove said yesterday. [/snippet]

[snippet]The man credited with engineering Mr. Bush's victorious 2000 campaign bragged of chasing Mr. Kerry out of a half-dozen states that were considered battlegrounds earlier in this year's contest. He said the list soon would grow to include Ohio, which is widely considered the most crucial state in the election. [/snippet]

[snippet]Mr. Rove said he thinks the president is five to six percentage points ahead of Mr. Kerry nationally, although the Bush campaign is not conducting national polls. However, Mr. Rove said, "We have an army of pollsters" doing extensive sampling in battleground states.
    "We've taken all the battleground states and molded them together so that we're doing 600 sample a night or 800 sample a night in every battleground state and then aggregating all of those," he said. [/snippet]

[snippet]He said a fiery speech by Mr. Kerry on Monday, followed by combative rhetoric on the campaign trail on Tuesday and yesterday, suggests Mr. Kerry will "go on the offensive" next week.
    "He will be the best debater the president's ever faced," Mr. Rove said. "We underestimate Kerry at our peril. He's very good at this; he thinks about it; he's an aggressor; he goes in there flailing." [/snippet]

More at link above

[J-Mann]

...not conducting national polls.  Yeah right.

[Sam Spade]

They've continually said they haven't conducted national polls for four years.  

I see no reason to doubt that, as it wouldn't make much sense to lie about something pointless like that.

[The Vorlon]

...not conducting national polls.  Yeah right.

re national polls:

I actually believe him.

If Bush gains 4% in Rhode Island - does it matter?
If Kerry gains 8% in Wyoming.. does it matter...?

Rove has 20 states he looks at, and polls the stuffings out of them.

Why waste time, energy and money polling Utah...?

[VietnamVeteran]

Vorlan your map needs explaining.

Start with Maine and New Hampshire being in the Bush column? Evidence to show this trend please.

You would put your life on it that if the election was held today Bush would tie Oregan and win Maine?

[Vasall des Midas]

Vorlan your map needs explaining.

Start with Maine and New Hampshire being in the Bush column? Evidence to show this trend please.

You would put your life on it that if the election was held today Bush would tie Oregan and win Maine?

As the first Maine is darker red then the 2nd Maine is blue, I don't think he's predicting Bush to take Maine.

[The Vorlon]

Vorlan your map needs explaining.

Start with Maine and New Hampshire being in the Bush column? Evidence to show this trend please.

You would put your life on it that if the election was held today Bush would tie Oregan and win Maine?

Maine

Maine is divided into 2 Congressional Districts.

Maine awards 1 EV to the winner of each district, and 2 to the overall state winner.

In 2000 Gore won CD1 by about 8% and CD2 by just 2% (average over the state of 5% or so)

My "map" divides Maine into it's two CDs.  I have Kerry up solid in CD1, with Bush marginally up in CD2.

Bush lost CD2 in 2000 by just 2%, given that Bush is up 4% or so Nationally and has a very helpful Hunter's Rights Ballot measure in Maine to help him in Maine CD2, I think a marginal Bush lead in CD2 is reasonable - Indeed shifting Maine CD1 a shade towards Bush is also not irrational IMHO, I just want to see some more polling before I do it.

New Hampshire is a mixed bag.

Mason Dixon has Bush up 9% (which I do not believe)
ARG, which is based in New Hampshire and has an "ok" record polling the state says Bush is up 2%. - ARG has also been running very cold for Bush this year, so the fact ARG has Bush up a bit has a little extra weight with me.

The Rasmussen Bot Poll has Kerry up 6%

Both the M/D and Bot are likely wrong, with the truth likely being in between - a marginal Bush lead... I think

IF I am not sure on a state, I just leave it for who won in 2000 BTW

Oregon

We have 6 polls recently - and they divide 3 / 3

Mason Dixon says Bush by 4
Riley Rersearch Says Bush by 1
Survey USA says Bush by 1

ARG says Kerry By 2
Rasmussen says Kerry by 7
Research 2000 says Kerry by 7

The problem here is that the two best firms (Mason-Dixon and Research 2000) are at the opposite extremes - if the polls were 3/3 and both Research2000 and Mason-Dixon were in the same group, I'd take that group over the other.

Looking over the SurveyUSA sample I am inclined to think Kerry has a modest advantage, but I'd have to think about it a bit.

In 2000, Gore + Nader beat Bush by about 5.5%. Take 4% off this for Bush's National lead and Kerry by 1 or 2% seems like a fairly common sense probability.  As well, if you average the 6 recent polls, Kerry comes out up about 1.5% or so.

I'll go with marginal advantage Kerry (o-2%) till I see another poll..

ok.. ?

[Vasall des Midas]

So what's the yellow on your map for?

[The Vorlon]

So what's the yellow on your map for?

States are under review is all.. no current projection...

[MODU]

So what's the yellow on your map for?

Those are the states which Vorlon is running strong in.  

[The Vorlon]

Those are the states which Vorlon is running strong in.  

Yup..

I have two VERY detailed polls of Minnesota and PA to go over.

I think Minnisota stays slight Kerry and PA slight Bush, but I want to think it over a bit

Oregon goes very light red

[MODU]

Those are the states which Vorlon is running strong in.  

Yup..

I have two VERY detailed polls of Minnesota and PA to go over.

I think Minnisota stays slight Kerry and PA slight Bush, but I want to think it over a bit

Oregon goes very light red

You are the guru, Vorlon.  I'm sure many of us are looking forward to your prediction, as well as your revisions as we get closer towards election day.

BTW . . . I have a revision for you regarding Hawai'i.  You can let Kerry have Oahu (since he'll most likely win the state anyway), but can us Independents claim an island of our own?  I'm thinking Kauai or Maui for starters, or even Ni'ihau (since they are autonomous to begin with).  

[The Vorlon]

Those are the states which Vorlon is running strong in.  

Yup..

I have two VERY detailed polls of Minnesota and PA to go over.

I think Minnisota stays slight Kerry and PA slight Bush, but I want to think it over a bit

Oregon goes very light red

You are the guru, Vorlon.  I'm sure many of us are looking forward to your prediction, as well as your revisions as we get closer towards election day.

BTW . . . I have a revision for you regarding Hawai'i.  You can let Kerry have Oahu (since he'll most likely win the state anyway), but can us Independents claim an island of our own?  I'm thinking Kauai or Maui for starters, or even Ni'ihau (since they are autonomous to begin with).  

Autonomy for Hawaii.. I like it

I am starting to think Bush is actually really opening this thing up a bit.  Party ID in state and National polls is consistently shifting 4-5 points towards the GOP. (ie very close Dems to Reps - something like 37/37/26 or so)  It is not just 1 or 2 or 5 polls either, it it dozens and dozens of them...

This is interesting to watch..

[12th Doctor]

...not conducting national polls.  Yeah right.

Acctually, I don't doubt it.  National polls are a waste of time and money, if you think about it.  The EV is what's important and thus, state polls are all that matter.