Thursday, August 5, 2004

Convention Bounce

Slate makes the argument that Kerry actually did receive a post-democratic convention bounce.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

kerry didn't get the only bounce that matters. what slate is doing is a whole bunch of "but but but..." stuff. kind of like michigan in usnews is ranked #7 but people keep harping about the residency directors since it's higher. there are lies, damn lies, and slate doing an article on kerry's post convention bounce.

Garrett said...

the whole point of putting out a post-convention bounce article is to show that conventions still have a place in influencing the electorate, and slate does that in that article. unless you've got a ph.d in stats, i don't understand your point. this has nothing to do with kerry as a candidate per se. barney the presidential dinosour candidate would theoretically get some sort of bounce from a convention. bush will get a bounce after the RNC (theoretically, if conventions still matter, which is the point that is up for debate).

Garrett said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

i'm not going to look into my magic ball and try to see what slate writers were thinking when they wrote this, but suffice to say that the issue of post-convention bounce, like most things lately, has become politicized. if you noticed, you saw the bush campaign predicting around a 7 point lead for kerry after the convention, thereby setting kerry up for dissapointment, whereas the kerry campaign was doing the opposite. and then when no bounce occurs the bush team can spell doom and gloom and try to capture that momentum while the kerry team tries to explain it away.

so i tend to disagree that the article is simply academic in nature. we both know that slate is... shall we say... left leaning, so it's of no surprise to me that they would publish an article defending kerry's no-bounce with some overly analytical red herring.