WHERE ARE MY GOP CONVENTION CREDENTIALS?
I've been a good party man, precinct chairman, attended the RNC in 1988 and Senator Broyhill was good enough to get me some floor credentials to see President Reagan speak. But I'm not going to the Republican National Convention.

It seems that the Dems are reaching out to bloggers! DrFrankLives of The Stinging-Nettle, a long time supporter of John Edwards, is going to the DNC. Sure, Edwards is from NC just like Stinging-Nettle and Federal Review, and DrFrank is closer to the inner circle of that presidential campaign, but come on Republicans. How about some love?

I'll be a good boy. I'll blog non-objectively during that week in New York. I'll make sure the Composite Poll shows a big Kerry lead on the eve of the convention so we can crow about a big bounce the next week! Heck, North Carolina is going to be a battleground, so this would be a great motivational tool for me! I even dropped a wad of cash on trinkets at the George W. Bush Store last night (if you dump Cheney, I'll have lots of collectors' items). Let me go and I'll help make Newt's prediction on Hannity & Colmes come true. Bush 58, Kerry 42.

I'm not above begging. How bout some floor or press credentials. E-mail me. Please. Doesn't this sound good? Live from New York. It's Federal Review!

**FEDERAL REVIEW COMPOSITE POLL™ UPDATE**
July 13, 2004

THE FIRST BOUNCE?
Bush 48.5% – 283 EV | Kerry 49.5% – 255 EV
EV without Toss Up states (under 2% margin): Bush 222 | Kerry 234 | Toss 82

Pundits have long pointed to the Veep selection as the time of the first real bounce in this relatively stable race. Edwards was selected on July 6, and we now have a full week of polling on the national level and state level (though many of the new state polls are from before the announcement). Was there a bounce?

Yes, kinda. Most polls show an increased lead for Kerry, but generally so small and within the range of past fluctuations in polling results over recent months. The Composite Poll shows a net gain for Kerry in one week of 2.7%. His biggest one week net gain was in the May 18 Composite Poll when he picked up 4.1% against Bush. That week was also Kerry's (or either candidate's) biggest lead since I began this analysis on March 9. Kerry led by 2.7%.

Since June 29, Kerry has gained almost 3.5% in the Composite Poll. But he continues to lose points in the Electoral College. We'll get to those in a minute.

The best way to see if Kerry's selection of Edwards gave him a real bounce is to look at polls of particular polling organizations and see how they have moved. For this reason, we have not used the one day "quickie" polls conducted by NBC, Time and CBS, each of which used a different pollster, had a high margin of error, and presumably had different polling methodology than earlier polls commissioned by the same news organizations.

Kerry/Edwards bounced a total of 6 points in the CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll, from being down by 1 on June 23, to up by 5 on July 11. But this represents little change from the June 6 Gallup poll, when Kerry also led by 6. So this could be a statistical fluctuation and not real movement.

Zogby shows no net bounce for Kerry. On June 5, he had the race a two point lead for Kerry. On July 7, a two point lead. Newsweek now gives Kerry a 3 point lead. On May 14 he only led by 1, but on April 9, Newsweek had Kerry up by 4, so he's down from that high.

Rasmussen also shows a statistically insignificant increase for Kerry (less than 1%).

But everyone, except for the AP/Ipsos poll (Bush by 4 on July 7 and by 1 on June 9), shows an increased margin for Kerry over immediatley preceding polling. And the Composite shows a bump. So, I think it's safe to say there really is a bounce here. It just isn't significant, but perhaps we shouldn't expect more with such a low number of potential voters reporting they are undecided each week.

So, what's happening with state polling. Well, state polling lags the national poll, so if this is a real bounce for Kerry I suspect we'll start to see it at the state level next week. Many of the new state polls in this week's analysis were Rasmussen polls, taken throughout the month of June. Thus, they reflect the race not as it stands on June 30, but they combine results obtained throughout the month. If Bush had a substantial lead in the first three weeks of June, but lost support during the last week, the Rasmussen month long polls will have a hard time showing that.

This week incorporates new polls in 27 states. Highlights include Arkansas (Bush +2 and Kerry +1), Illinois (Kerry +16), Iowa (Kerry +4), Maine (Kerry +1), Michigan (Kerry +2, +7 or +3), Minnesota (Kerry +9), Missouri (Bush +3), New Jersey (Kerry +10), North Carolina - post Edwards selection (Bush +15), Ohio (Bush +4), Pennsylvania (Kerry +5), Virginia (Bush +4), Washington (Kerry +9).

A note about Florida: Rasmussen's Florida poll gives Kerry a 5 point lead, while SurveyUSA gives him a 3 point lead. Because my analysis is designed to show trends and not necessarily today's snapshot through a weighted average of state polls (giving more weight to newer ones, but some weight to older ones), I still don't have Florida in the Kerry column. Why? Two Florida polls that are only a couple of weeks old showed Bush leading by 7 and 10 points. In this analysis, Florida is trending for Kerry, it just needs another poll to validate the two latest polls to push it over to him. Or another poll favorable for Bush to validate the June polls.

Now some data:

This Week’s Polls
AP/Ipsos (Bush 49 | Kerry 45)
CNN/USAToday/Gallup (Bush 45 | Kerry 50)
Zogby (Bush 45 | Kerry 47)
Newsweek (Bush 44 | Kerry 47)
Rasmussen Week Average (Bush 45.7 | Kerry 47)
Iowa Electronic Vote Share Market (Bush 50.9 | 47.5)

Last Week’s Polls
Fox News/Opinion Dynamics (Bush 47 | Kerry 40)
CBS (Bush 43 | Kerry 42)
CNN/USAToday/Gallup (Bush 48 | Kerry 47)
Rasmussen Week Average (Bush 45.4 | Kerry 45.9)
Iowa Electronic Vote Share Market (Bush 53.0 | Kerry 46.1)

Bush State Gains
Ohio

Kerry State Gains
New Mexico
Oregon

Toss Ups (slight lead of less than 2%)
Florida *NEW* (Bush)
New Hampshire (Bush)
Ohio (Bush)
Pennsylvania (Kerry)
Wisconsin (Bush)


Full data, maps and graphs are updatedon the Composite Poll page.

BUSH'S WAR ROOM
Here's a good article by The New York Times about Bush's campaign war room. So many have charged about the secrecy of this administration, conjuring images of Karl Rove in some back room constructing voodoo dolls and reading entrails. Now, these shadowing figures have allowed a Times reporter to spend a whole day with the operation. But this was curious:

Mr. Bush's campaign agreed to requests from two news organizations to observe the war room's activities for a day; Mr. Kerry's campaign denied the same request.

CHEAP SHOT ALERT! Kerry's war room denied the request so they could have time to get the Marx and Lenin posters off of the wall.

DITKA FOR SENATE
Putting partisan interests aside, wouldn't a Senator Ditka be fun to watch? No more of this "My friend from Vermont" crap when you're talking about someone who has gone around town questioning your ethics and stabbing you in the back. Ditka would call BS "BS" and do it publicly and forcefully. Not quietly like the Vice President.

Imagine his press conferences!

And he showed his attitude today as he stormed out of a meeting with Republicans when he found out that someone leaked to Drudge that he'd run. Go Ditka.

UPDATE: Rep. Watt (D-NC) drops F-bomb on Ralph Nader. Go Mel.

TAX CUTS WORKING...AGAIN

Reuters has an article which helps to demonstrate that tax cuts don't cause deficits, they cure them.

According to the article, the "U.S. government posted a larger-than-expected budget surplus in June, propped up by higher quarterly business tax receipts."

The higher tax receipts were the result of the economic recovery. The economic recovery was spurred by the tax cuts.

This is nothing new. Every time taxes are cut, whether by Bush, Reagan, Kennedy or any other president, it stimulates the economy and brings in more revenue to the treasury.

Now, if we could just get our elected officials to cut spending, we could really cure the deficit.

FILE THIS UNDER "DUH..."

The New York Post reports that Big Apple politicians are aghast at the fact that "[t]city is sending as much as $11 billion a year more in taxes to Albany than it's getting back in state aid."

However, what did they expect?

Have these politicians forgotten that the whole purpose of a system of taxation is the redistribution of wealth? Since New York City has more money than upstate, it's the logical consequence of progessive taxation that more goes out than comes back. Furthermore, if the same amount of money were returned to New York City as was sent to the State, there would be no reason to send it to the State in the first place.

If these politicians really want to end the exodus of cash from their constituents, the answer is simple: cut taxes.

NORTH CAROLINA - NOT A BATTLEGROUND?
I've written often that people who think that John Edwards would not help the Democratic ticket win North Carolina were wrong, that they were putting too much stock in some polls suggesting he couldn't win his Senate seat. I said that because of fawning local media coverage that Senators generally get, and the local-boy-made-good angle, he'd certainly put North Carolina in play.

Maybe I'm wrong. A new Gallup poll of North Carolina voters shows the biggest lead yet for Bush over Kerry in North Carolina. Fifteen points, 56-41. Bigger than any other NC poll taken since last September. Bigger than Gore's 13 point win.

Compared to polling in North Carolina from March to right before the Edwards selection, putting a native North Carolinian on the Democratic ticket has given the Republicans at least a 7 point bump. Look for coattails if the margin is this big in November.

THE FOLLY OF CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWS
You are limited to giving $2,000 to the federal candidate of your choice during the primary season, which will then be used by your candidate to pay expenses, and especially, to buy advertising. Similar limitations do not apply to issue advertising that is not allowed to endorse the election (or non-election) of a particular candidate. Issue ads obviously do endorse candidate's election or removal, Contact President Bush, and tell him to keep standing up for taxpayers. It's just legal fiction that makes people feel like they are doing something about "the money in politics", but has no substantive meaning or effect.

Of course, the McCain Feingold First Amendment Limitations Act (all hail its name) prevents the airing of issue ads within 60 days of an election. I wonder, if they don't actually endorse candidates, why should they be limited at election time? Regardless, they are until a judge reads the Constitution.

And this should worry the Kerry/Edwards campaign. USAToday explains that from March 3 through June 26, pro-Kerry anti-Bush ads in 17 battleground states have exceed pro-Bush, anti-Kerry ads by a whopping 82% (not counting Fahrenheit whatever, the liberal (but corporate owned) mainstream media or the reimagined Manchurian Candidate). And yet, in those states, as nationally, the race is still neck and neck. Maybe the ad blitz from Kerry 04, MoveOn.org and The Media Fund has kept Kerry from being blown away in the polls during a time that Bush was getting harangued daily for the situation in Iraq. Makes you wonder how Kerry/Edwards will do in September and October, right after the Republican National Convention concludes, and "issue" ads are banned.