Does the bounce matter?
By the Wolf Blitzer Reports Staff
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Before the convention, some Democrats argued that John Kerry already had a bounce and wouldn't likely see much of one after Boston.
Perhaps it was a self-fulfilling prophecy as Kerry lost a percentage point among registered voter's choice for president. Monday's CNN/USA Today Gallup poll of registered voters indicates Kerry went from 49 percent before the convention to 48 percent following the convention.
With the race so close all year and with many voters apparently having made up their minds long ago, analysts CNN spoke to agree there wasn't much of a bounce to be had.
"This year, we're seeing a historically low number of persuadable voters. Only about one in seven, one in six, possibly even fewer than that are 'persuadable,' undecided voters," said CNN polling director Keating Holland.
But history sends mixed signals on the importance of the bounce.
In 1980, incumbent Jimmy Carter got a 10-point bounce -- huge by modern standards -- from the Democratic National Convention, but it didn't help him against challenger Ronald Reagan.
Then in 1988, Michael Dukakis got a seven-point bounce, compared with George H.W. Bush's six-point surge after the Republican convention.
One analyst said the modest bounce for Bush was much more important, and he couldn't have won that election without it.
In 1992, young challenger Bill Clinton moved ahead of the Democratic pack, but was not yet a familiar national figure. He dominated the Democratic convention, received the largest bounce in modern political history -- 16-points -- and defeated incumbent President George H.W. Bush.
Popular rhetoric in recent years says the conventions have lost news value.
Ratings show more people watched Kerry's acceptance speech than Al Gore's four years ago. A CNN poll shows the percentage of people who say they watched some or all of convention went up from four years ago.
