| | Comments (0)
People keep saying undecideds usually break for the incumbent. Perhaps that's technically true, but there's a few things to keep in mind:

  • In 2000, while Gore was not the incumbent, he represented incumbency to most people, to a large degree, and undecideds broke to him (Bush led by about 4% in polls, going into election day, and Gore had more votes nationwide by 0.5%).
  • We usually have a lot more undecideds, and the number by which undecideds break for the incumbent (about 2/3 to 3/4) is the approximate number undecideds are fewer now than in 2000 (was 7% in 2000, is 3% now).
  • One of the major reasons undecideds break for the challenger is because people decide that they just want change (this is probably why they broke for Gore in 2000, because the felt we did NOT need change), but security concerns changes all that math.
  • We have less reason to grant credibility to the polls this year than any year before, anyway.

Just some random thoughts in my noggin' ... it will be interesting to see the results of polls vs actual results. slashdot.org

Leave a comment

<pudge/*> (pronounced "PudgeGlob") is thousands of posts over many years by Pudge.

"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt."

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by pudge published on October 31, 2004 4:44 PM.

FUD was the previous entry in this site.

Prediction is the next entry in this site.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.