« Michigan Poll Shows Kerry Ahead 48-42 | Main | Pew Research Center Report Shows Swing Voters Closer to Kerry Than Bush »

Pennsylvania Poll Shows Kerry Holding Lead

A Quinnipiac University poll released on August 18th shows Democratic challenger John Kerry holding a 47 42 percent lead over President George W. Bush among Pennsylvania voters, with 4 percent for independent candidate Ralph Nader.

Military veterans or voters with a household member who is a veteran or currently in active duty or reserve service support Kerry 46 42 percent, with 6 percent for Nader. These voters from military families say 54 41 percent that the war is wrong.

"Despite a month of relentless campaigning by the Republican and Democratic camps in Pennsylvania, the presidential horse race remains virtually the same" said Clay F. Richards, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

"In what may prove to be damaging news for the President, the anti-war attitude among voters from military households in Pennsylvania is greater than the attitude among all voters. Kerry hold the same slim lead among these voters that he has among the electorate in general," Richards added.

Comments

This, and the Michigan poll results below, are very encouraging news. Now, DNC folks need to start publicly building up expectations of a "bounce" for Bush/Cheney from the upcoming Republican Convention. Send some surrogates out to tell the media that anything short of 12-15% surge in Chimpy's poll numbers will be a sure sign of failure -- and a victory for Kerry/Edwards.

Immediately after the convention the electoral-vote(polls) should look like it did when Reagn beat Mondale. Anything short of that and Bush will have failed miserably, again.

I have been thinking about just where is George Bush going to get his votes this time around? I would think that most all the people who voted for Gore are still pissed off and will vote for Kerry with Gusto. GW got the Right Wing Evangical votes last time and he will get them more that likely this time. Some gays voted for Bush last time however this time I would think he looses most of the gay vote including his Log Cabin Republicans. Plus the fact that the economy isn't as good as it was in 2000 and this war in Iraq is still hanging out there. So, I see Kerry gaining more votes that GW.

Ed: You're probably right, but at the same time it's very easy to get caught inside our bubble with only people who agree with us. Keep in mind, that at a couple different points in his presidency, Bush had many millions of voters who voted for Gore persuaded to switch. Sure, most of those have now returned to Kerry, but not all. In fact, there seem to be a fair number of moderate to conservative Dems and independents who have NOT returned to the fold. The polls seem to indicate, in fact, that the party switchers about cancel each other out.

I know I've had to catch myself several times, because not only do I not KNOW any Gore voters who are now voting for Bush (nor any Nader voters who are sticking with Ralph, btw), I can't even IMAGINE such a voter. But they are out there, without doubt. They may not live near either of us, but they are out there.

They're out there alright. WAY out there.

I have to believe the news about military-veteran families turning against the war is huge. These families could make all the difference in PA and other swing states, specifically WV, NC, VA, and TN .

Michelle from the blog, "A Small Victory" says she was liberal and now has become a hard core Bushy. I don't know if she was liberal before, but if she was, she did a total 180.

There apparently are a small group of voters who are more put off by Kerry's protest leadership after he returned from Nam than they respect his service even though he had doubts about Vietnam Policy from the beginning. Some of those are former Gore voters who may support Bush. Without question there remain a healthy number of people who see the war protest as aid and comfort to the enemy. I hope that is a small number in safely Blue States.

But PA looks hopeful. Now I'd like to hear good news from Ohio.

"Without question there remain a healthy number of people who see the war protest as aid and comfort to the enemy." Hmmm . . . sounds familiar, doesn't it? Too bad there wasn't a Patriot Act back then, and "Herr" Ashcroft to enforce it. Why, maybe Lt. Kerry could have been detained indefinitely as an "enemy combatant" . . .

I think it's the Anneburg website that givesa state by state breakdown of the vote by party, ie how many Repubs will vote for Bush and how many for Kerry etc. Both parties have a crossover vote. The day I checked, about a week ago, the crossover vote for the Repubs was seven, eight, nine percent and the crossover vote for the Democrats was a little less. I was disappointed because I keep hearing all these stories about Repubs who just can't vote for Bush and I just can't imagine a Democrat who would vote for Bush. But the poll showed that there was a crossover vote in every state and that the the Repubs had only a slightly larger group straying to the Dems than the Dems had to the Repubs.

I forgot to mention the Nader factor this time is not much of a factor this time around. So, we get a lot of those votes also. I just can't see where Bush gets any new votes this time other than new voters comming of age and the polls show that Kerry is WAY ahead of Bush with them. I really do think that the election will not be as close as every one seems to think. Maybe I am too optimistic, I hope not.

Ed,

I'm with you on that. I try not to let myself think that way, but when I look at, in what seem to be realistic terms, I don't think it's going to be that close. I look at two key elections from earlier in the year, a Congressional seat in Kentucky, and the Senate seat in S. Dakota (or was it N. Dakota). In both cases, areas that Bush carried easily in 2000, the seats were won by Democrats!! I feel that there a lot of anti-Bush support out there, that the polls are not quite picking up. One big question for the Republicans is, not how many will vote for Kerry, but how many won't vote at all, due to them not supporting Bush that stongly. The Democrats are focused on getting rid of Bush. Unless something really big happens, I don't think they can lose.

but how many won't vote at all, due to them not supporting Bush that stongly.

This is one reason this administration is trying to get the swing states to have the Gay marrage thing on thier ballot so to make sure the base will go and vote. But the base voted last time in strength also. But, the Demoratic Base was not fired up like we are now so the Dem base is a lot stronger this time. I am one of them, last time I was not to hot for Gore I thought he was kind of dull almost like Dole so, I didn't vote but not this time. I'm in Calif. Gore won the state so, I guess it didn't matter.

News from Missouri that Nader did not meet the deadline with sufficient signatures to be on the Missouri November ballot. 4,000 signatures out of 13,000 were disqualified. Is this pattern consistent with other states?

If we can carry 30-35 EV's from Nevada, Arizona, North Carolina, Arkansas, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, New Hampshire, Colorado, and Georgia; this thing is over! It's doable, do we have the commitment to pull this off?

Just a note on the discussion of party crossover:
Someone commented on how few Gore voters were likely to switch to Bush, and someone else answered with poll results showing a countable number of Democrats saying they're voting for Bush.
These are two different matters. There are people out there who self-identify as Democrats but haven't voted for a national Democratic ticket since the days of Jimmy Carter. If they tell a pollster they're voting for Bush, so what? They voted for him in Y2K too. I think very few people who actually voted for Gore will switch, and quite a few who voted for Bush will, if not switch to Kerry, at least stay home. And a number of Y2K stay-at-homes will turn out for Kerry, and so will at least a few Naderites. Even half a million net changes in each direction - Bush to Kerry, Bush to home, home to Kerry and Nader to Kerry - should give us a pretty sizeable victory, maybe even bordering on tamperproof.
Hey, all we really need is the same vote as last time plus the implausible 3000 "Jews-for-Buchanan" in Dade County figuring out how to do it right this time, and we win.
New voters and deceased former voters should cancel out; the young and the elderly are both trending Democrat. More people have turned 18 than have died since Y2K, but the young aren't as likely to vote, (maybe less unlikely this year though,) and some immigrant groups trend Republican out of hyperpatriotism or entrepreneurial mindset - my father came from Greece some 90 years ago and voted GOP till he died. So the newly enfranchised and disenfranchised ought to be a wash. (Let's not get into felony convictions since Y2K...)