PDA

View Full Version : Bush Within 6 In New York, Within 4 In Illinois...Kerry Campaign Collapsing


RINGLEADER
09-15-2004, 06:40 PM
Polls coming out later...

ROFL

RINGLEADER
09-15-2004, 06:44 PM
Add this to the NJ poll Rasmussen had a couple days ago that showed Bush only 2 points behind in that state...

beavis
09-15-2004, 07:30 PM
Add this to the NJ poll Rasmussen had a couple days ago that showed Bush only 2 points behind in that state...
Wow, I'm starting to smell a landslide.

RINGLEADER
09-15-2004, 07:36 PM
Bush now LEADS in NJ by 4 points.

Chief Henry
09-15-2004, 07:37 PM
Bush now LEADS in NJ by 4 points.


I don't beleave that for one minute RL....Thats INSANE and SIC.

Please post a link..... :hmmm:

trndobrd
09-15-2004, 07:37 PM
Paging Mr. Mondale....Mr. Mondale, please pick up the white courtesy phone.

Jenson71
09-15-2004, 07:40 PM
You can thank maboy Rudy for this.

WoodDraw
09-15-2004, 07:57 PM
The battleground states switching away from the normal ones to 2000 Gore states is definitely good news for Bush but I'd be shocked to see him win any of those. Any link to the poll?

You can thank maboy Rudy for this.

I just wish he was the one running for President. :/

Jenson71
09-15-2004, 08:01 PM
I just wish he was the one running for President. :/

:thumb: '08 man. I'm planning on volunteering some how on his campaign.

Michael Michigan
09-15-2004, 08:10 PM
Bush now LEADS in NJ by 4 points.

Yikes!!

http://www.surveyusa.com/2004_Elections/NJ040915president.pdf

More--Minnesota now tied.

45%-45%

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040915/dcw053_1.html

I now have it 320-218.

Jenson71
09-15-2004, 08:16 PM
Has anyone volunteered on a campaign before? Is there even such a thing? I saw it on Taxi Driver. Remember, I don't live in the real world.

WoodDraw
09-15-2004, 08:19 PM
:thumb: '08 man. I'm planning on volunteering some how on his campaign.

Let's hope. It would be a horrible mistake for the Republican party not to nominate him based on social issues.

Loki
09-15-2004, 08:21 PM
Wow, I'm starting to smell a landslide.


does landslide mean kerry is making a comeback?

trndobrd
09-15-2004, 08:25 PM
does landslide mean kerry is making a comeback?


jAZ sez "yes it does"

Loki
09-15-2004, 08:30 PM
jAZ sez "yes it does"

jaz sez so eh? it must be right then.

polls schmolls....

RINGLEADER
09-15-2004, 08:38 PM
I know we're a long way from the 2:00 minute warning in this election, but if these results continue to trend in the direction they're trending they may call this election after the first hour on November 2nd (note to Jaz, Taco, Hel'n and other libbies...bookmark this post in case I'm wrong so you can throw it back in my face ;) ).

Think about it, if Bush takes Maine, New Jersey, Pennsylvania in the first hour that would represent 42 Electoral Votes that he didn't get last time. He could lose Florida and Ohio and still win. Although if he wins New Jersey I would betcha there's going to be a landslide that eclipses even my projection of a 321-217 Bush win.

LVNHACK
09-15-2004, 08:44 PM
jAZ sez "yes it does"




Has there even been a jAZ siting....?????

Cochise
09-15-2004, 11:23 PM
Think about it, if Bush takes Maine, New Jersey, Pennsylvania in the first hour that would represent 42 Electoral Votes that he didn't get last time. He could lose Florida and Ohio and still win. Although if he wins New Jersey I would betcha there's going to be a landslide that eclipses even my projection of a 321-217 Bush win.

If the polls continue trending the way they have in the past month or so he could end up pulling 40 states.

Wouldn't it be fun to watch pinkounderground and this forum if Bush captured about 400 electoral votes? ROFL

beavis
09-15-2004, 11:29 PM
Wouldn't it be fun to watch pinkounderground and this forum if Bush captured about 400 electoral votes? ROFL
I dunno, I bet if it does happen, a lot of the libs will be on "vacation" for a while.

RINGLEADER
09-15-2004, 11:44 PM
If the polls continue trending the way they have in the past month or so he could end up pulling 40 states.

Wouldn't it be fun to watch pinkounderground and this forum if Bush captured about 400 electoral votes? ROFL


If Bush wins big...or even if he wins small...I don't think many of the liberals will be around here. Denise and Hel'n will probably come by talking about how it's not their fault how bad America will become, but this place is going to die a quick death on November 3rd.

Of course, if Bush loses I'll post my congratulations and move on too...

Michael Michigan
09-16-2004, 12:15 AM
The hits just keep on coming...


USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup has another poll showing Bush/Cheney vs. Kerry/Edwards head to head.

This one has the president leading 48%-46%. That puts 10 more Electoral College votes in the red states.

My Electoral College Scoreboard now stands at Bush 330- Kerry 208.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/polls/2004-09-15-minn.htm

RINGLEADER
09-16-2004, 01:32 AM
The hits just keep on coming...


USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup has another poll showing Bush/Cheney vs. Kerry/Edwards head to head.

This one has the president leading 48%-46%. That puts 10 more Electoral College votes in the red states.

My Electoral College Scoreboard now stands at Bush 330- Kerry 208.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/polls/2004-09-15-minn.htm

Yeah, but isn't Nader on the ballot in MN? They're tied at 45 with Nader in the mix.

Also, there's a Harris Interactive poll coming out tomorrow showing Kerry in the lead 48-47.

Michael Michigan
09-16-2004, 01:42 AM
Yeah, but isn't Nader on the ballot in MN? They're tied at 45 with Nader in the mix.

Also, there's a Harris Interactive poll coming out tomorrow showing Kerry in the lead 48-47.

Looks likely. And thanks for the tip on Harris.

http://www.startribune.com/stories/484/4979520.html

Nader likely to make it onto the ballot in Minnesota
September 14, 2004 NADE0

Supporters of independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader filed petitions with the Minnesota Secretary of State's office Monday in an attempt to get him on the Nov. 2 ballot.

They need 2,000 valid voter signatures for Nader to qualify for the ballot, and "at first glance, they appear to have enough," said Kent Kaiser, a spokesman for the secretary of state's office.

Kaiser said staff members were working to finish reviewing the signatures by the end of the workday Monday.

Supporters said they turned in 4,781 signatures. "We wanted to overshoot," said Danene Provencher, Nader's Minnesota coordinator.

Nader, who had an outsized effect on the results of the 2000 election, is struggling this year. The Green Party, his former home, has endorsed another candidate. He has struggled to get on the ballot in some states, and sometimes has been blocked by Democrats convinced that his presence will drain away votes from their ticket.

In Minnesota, DFL officials have said they won't try to keep Nader off the ballot.

Depending on how many votes Nader gets in the state, he could be a wild card in a race that appears to be exceptionally tight. Four years ago, he got 5 percent of the vote in Minnesota, one of his best showings in the nation.

Nader will visit the Twin Cities on Thursday to give two speeches -- at 6 p.m. at Macalester College's chapel in St. Paul and at 8 p.m. at the Ted Mann Concert Hall at the University of Minnesota.

Chief Henry
09-16-2004, 08:49 AM
WOWSERS, after you guys posting this stuff.
Me thinks that the DD's (desperate dems) will be
going to the grocery store to pick out thier favorite flavor of KOOL-AID. I can't beleave NJ is in play for W. Thats just nuts.

KCTitus
09-16-2004, 08:51 AM
Kerry needs to get his message out...that's the real problem...

Did you all know he was in Vietnam?

Cochise
09-16-2004, 09:07 AM
Kerry needs to get his message out...that's the real problem...

Did you all know he was in Vietnam?

No kidding! Damn guess I can't vote for Bush now :banghead:

ChiTown
09-16-2004, 09:12 AM
Kerry needs to get his message out...that's the real problem...

Did you all know he was in Vietnam?

Yep. I saw his new SE Asian manual on how to burn down villages and and kill innocent women and children. Insightful.........

Cochise
09-16-2004, 09:15 AM
Yep. I saw his new SE Asian manual on how to burn down villages and and kill innocent women and children. Insightful.........

Why are you questioning his patriotism? Don't you know he was in Vietnam?

ChiTown
09-16-2004, 09:20 AM
Why are you questioning his patriotism? Don't you know he was in Vietnam?

Vietnam, really? Heh, I was talking about Taiwan......

Hoover
09-16-2004, 09:25 AM
Has anyone volunteered on a campaign before? Is there even such a thing? I saw it on Taxi Driver. Remember, I don't live in the real world.

I have not Volunteered on a Presidential but I did work for Steve Forbes in 2000 on that Presidential Campaing.

Its easy to volunteer if you are from a battle ground state, or in a state like Iowa where the process starts.

If you have more questions fire away. Politics is my life, Job, ect.

oldandslow
09-16-2004, 09:49 AM
Ringleader-

I work with a dem pollster. (Doesn't make me a dem - although most of the time I lean that way - just a pretty fair statistician).

Lotsa new data out showing Bush really gaining ground with the female electorate. That, according to my analysis, was where he was going to lose the election, if he lost.

Seems women (esp suburbia) are now buying that Bush will make them "safer" than Kerry. Rural women were already more pro-bush due to his social issue stances. Women also suspect Kerry's character.

This is a terrible election for the dems.

They picked the one candidate that makes the Bob Dole campaign look good.

I hate the Iowa Caucus!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If I were running the party (and I have made this suggestion) Dems would forget about the white house in 04 and spend tons of bucks in the locals and states.

Bush's coattails are short, imo. While I don't believe the dems can take back the house and/or senate, they can gain a house seat or two and stay even in the senate.

That's the best they can hope for this year. Unless Bush makes a huge error, or a Black Monday happens again, this election is over.

FringeNC
09-16-2004, 10:46 AM
Ringleader-

I work with a dem pollster. (Doesn't make me a dem - although most of the time I lean that way - just a pretty fair statistician).

Lotsa new data out showing Bush really gaining ground with the female electorate. That, according to my analysis, was where he was going to lose the election, if he lost.

Seems women (esp suburbia) are now buying that Bush will make them "safer" than Kerry. Rural women were already more pro-bush due to his social issue stances. Women also suspect Kerry's character.

This is a terrible election for the dems.

They picked the one candidate that makes the Bob Dole campaign look good.

I hate the Iowa Caucus!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If I were running the party (and I have made this suggestion) Dems would forget about the white house in 04 and spend tons of bucks in the locals and states.

Bush's coattails are short, imo. While I don't believe the dems can take back the house and/or senate, they can gain a house seat or two and stay even in the senate.

That's the best they can hope for this year. Unless Bush makes a huge error, or a Black Monday happens again, this election is over.


Got a question for you...what do you think about Rasmussen versus other pollsters with regards to whether party ID should be hard-weighted...?

RINGLEADER
09-16-2004, 10:46 AM
Ringleader-

I work with a dem pollster. (Doesn't make me a dem - although most of the time I lean that way - just a pretty fair statistician).

Lotsa new data out showing Bush really gaining ground with the female electorate. That, according to my analysis, was where he was going to lose the election, if he lost.

Seems women (esp suburbia) are now buying that Bush will make them "safer" than Kerry. Rural women were already more pro-bush due to his social issue stances. Women also suspect Kerry's character.

This is a terrible election for the dems.

They picked the one candidate that makes the Bob Dole campaign look good.

I hate the Iowa Caucus!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If I were running the party (and I have made this suggestion) Dems would forget about the white house in 04 and spend tons of bucks in the locals and states.

Bush's coattails are short, imo. While I don't believe the dems can take back the house and/or senate, they can gain a house seat or two and stay even in the senate.

That's the best they can hope for this year. Unless Bush makes a huge error, or a Black Monday happens again, this election is over.


Thanks for the info! There's a story in the Chicago Tribune today that echos a lot of what you say:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0409160257sep16,1,3685848.story?coll=chi-news-hed

This can still change quickly, but right now Bush is making his inroads with woman and Democrats. In pretty much all the polls he's drawing twice the Dem support than Kerry is getting from Republicans.

As far as the nomination process is concerned, this is what happens when the whole process is compressed and the process is not used to vet potential candidates but to select who you think is more "electable". Kerry's campaign played the primaries perfectly, focusing on Vietnam and then, with an assist from Terry McAuliffe, contrasting his service with negative stories about Bush's National Guard service.

I said at the time, and recently, that the Democrats blew their wad on the Bush National Guard stories back in February. Most of the Dems on the board thought I was nuts, but I really think that most people have moved beyond the issue barring some admission from the president that is relevant to his actions today.

I feel for you as a left-leaner because you're experiencing the same crap Republicans went through when Dole was the nominee in 96. I don't think Kerry's out of it by any means, but if he doesn't pummel Bush in the debates this election will be over. If Kerry does manage to beat Bush soundly in the debates he'll keep his hopes alive, but that first debate is going to be for all the marbles as far as Kerry is concerned.

RINGLEADER
09-16-2004, 10:51 AM
Got a question for you...what do you think about Rasmussen versus other pollsters with regards to whether party ID should be hard-weighted...?

I think that it is important as a basis for judging the reliability of the poll. If a poll shows 45% Dem and 28% Republican it is BS. Same if the results are vice-versa. The ones that show more Republican relative to last election, however, aren't necessarily bad. If Democratic turn-out is depressed because of the candidate and Republicans are fired up then the Time poll is more accurate (that shows 34% Republican/35% Democratic). If the turn-out is the same as last year then Rasmussen is probably closer to the truth.

I tend to look at these two different types of analysis as best case-worst case.

Dick Morris, for what it's worth, thinks that the Republican to Democrat ratio will be much closer to even this year based on...what the pollsters are seeing.

oldandslow
09-16-2004, 11:25 AM
Kerry's early (and almost entire) campaign message was that he was a soldier. Look at how he won the Iowa Caucus - ran the ad with the guy who he picked up out of the water - and became the Instahero who could be the war Pres and look "generalish" when he stood next to GW.

What an ignorant thing to do. People are not stupid. They know when you have a propensity to hang with Fonda and throw away (or not throw away) medals that you probably are not going to be viewed favorably on the "Soldier Boy" front.

The dems had a chance for a "realigning election" with this particular campaign and blew it.

I know I am ranting, but let me give you another piece of analysis-

My thoughts on the Bush surge go to the convention
speeches. It is all people watch from the conventions anyway. My take-

Michael Gearson (Bush speech writer) is a genious. Terry Edmonds (ex-Clinton-Kerry speech writer did not fair so well). Believe it or not, Clinton actually penned many of his own speeches - Edmonds just added flair. I think they attempted the same approach with Kerry and well...Kerry is no Clinton. Further, Bush's speech was of a higher intellectual quality than Kerry's was. Take a look at this

Bush - words 4993 - words per sentence 18.8 - sentences per paragraph 2.9 -characters per word 4.6 - Reading Level 10.5.

Kerry - words 5153 - words per sentence 16.1 - sentences per paragrapgh 2.65 - Characters per word 4.3 - Reading Level 8.0.

Kerry's speech was dumbed down, Bush's was not. What I think Kerry was attempting to do was to play to Joe six-pack everyman. Further, the "help is on the way" lines are strictly Southern Populist 101. People, however, are smart enough to realize that Kerry is NOT a southern populist. Edwards, yeah. Kerry no. I honestly believe if Edwards makes that speech, the polls do not move as far as they did.

Second, Bush's speech made him seem presidential. Confident. The themes of safety and security play really well (especially when you add the Russian disaster). People want to see that confidence. They don't want to be told that help is on the way by a blue blood. What they want is to feel SAFE. They want to believe that their country is doing the right thing. Bush's speech, I think, was a fine case of eloquent simplicity. Patriotism, security, moral high ground, and confidence work much better than paternalism from the NE.

I would never in a million years vote for GWB. However, I can recognize a professionally run campaign when I see one. Rove may even be better than Carville.

Calcountry
09-16-2004, 12:23 PM
jaz sez so eh? it must be right then.

polls schmolls....
The biggest indicator that things are not going well, is the silence of Jaz. He has been noticably absent here of late.

KCWolfman
09-16-2004, 12:27 PM
The biggest indicator that things are not going well, is the silence of Jaz. He has been noticably absent here of late.
He used the excuse he was on the football format, but I haven't seen him posting there either.

He looked like a fool with the CBS and Rather defense. Like Kerry, he is skulking nearby and hoping for it to blow over.

KCTitus
09-16-2004, 12:45 PM
He used the excuse he was on the football format, but I haven't seen him posting there either.

Thought I would post some post numbers to give you an idea of whether or not the 'start of football season' is a ruse or not:

9/16: Chiefs: 0, DC: 0
9/15: Chiefs: 6, DC: 1
9/14: Chiefs: 20, DC: 0
9/13: Chiefs: 7, DC: 0
9/12: Chiefs: 5, DC: 15
9/11: Chiefs: 8, DC: 16
9/10: Chiefs: 3, DC: 50

Michael Michigan
09-16-2004, 12:51 PM
Kerry's early (and almost entire) campaign message was that he was a soldier. Look at how he won the Iowa Caucus - ran the ad with the guy who he picked up out of the water - and became the Instahero who could be the war Pres and look "generalish" when he stood next to GW.

What an ignorant thing to do. People are not stupid. They know when you have a propensity to hang with Fonda and throw away (or not throw away) medals that you probably are not going to be viewed favorably on the "Soldier Boy" front.

The dems had a chance for a "realigning election" with this particular campaign and blew it.

I know I am ranting, but let me give you another piece of analysis-

My thoughts on the Bush surge go to the convention
speeches. It is all people watch from the conventions anyway. My take-

Michael Gearson (Bush speech writer) is a genious. Terry Edmonds (ex-Clinton-Kerry speech writer did not fair so well). Believe it or not, Clinton actually penned many of his own speeches - Edmonds just added flair. I think they attempted the same approach with Kerry and well...Kerry is no Clinton. Further, Bush's speech was of a higher intellectual quality than Kerry's was. Take a look at this

Bush - words 4993 - words per sentence 18.8 - sentences per paragraph 2.9 -characters per word 4.6 - Reading Level 10.5.

Kerry - words 5153 - words per sentence 16.1 - sentences per paragrapgh 2.65 - Characters per word 4.3 - Reading Level 8.0.

Kerry's speech was dumbed down, Bush's was not. What I think Kerry was attempting to do was to play to Joe six-pack everyman. Further, the "help is on the way" lines are strictly Southern Populist 101. People, however, are smart enough to realize that Kerry is NOT a southern populist. Edwards, yeah. Kerry no. I honestly believe if Edwards makes that speech, the polls do not move as far as they did.

Second, Bush's speech made him seem presidential. Confident. The themes of safety and security play really well (especially when you add the Russian disaster). People want to see that confidence. They don't want to be told that help is on the way by a blue blood. What they want is to feel SAFE. They want to believe that their country is doing the right thing. Bush's speech, I think, was a fine case of eloquent simplicity. Patriotism, security, moral high ground, and confidence work much better than paternalism from the NE.

I would never in a million years vote for GWB. However, I can recognize a professionally run campaign when I see one. Rove may even be better than Carville.


Interesting take.

Thanks.

:toast:

patteeu
09-16-2004, 01:06 PM
I think that it is important as a basis for judging the reliability of the poll. If a poll shows 45% Dem and 28% Republican it is BS. Same if the results are vice-versa. The ones that show more Republican relative to last election, however, aren't necessarily bad. If Democratic turn-out is depressed because of the candidate and Republicans are fired up then the Time poll is more accurate (that shows 34% Republican/35% Democratic). If the turn-out is the same as last year then Rasmussen is probably closer to the truth.

I tend to look at these two different types of analysis as best case-worst case.

Dick Morris, for what it's worth, thinks that the Republican to Democrat ratio will be much closer to even this year based on...what the pollsters are seeing.

Forgive me if this is a dumb comment/question. I'm no polling expert.

Isn't polling based on the idea that sampling should be as purely random as possible? If it is important to make sure your sampling of republicans and democrats is as close to proportional as possible, why isn't it also important to have a proportional mix of employed/unemployed. And a proportional mix of adults with children and those without. And a proportional mix of veterans and nonveterans. And a proportional mix of college educated professionals and blue color laborers. And a proportional mix of elderly and young. Why can't random sampling account for party affiliation in the same way it accounts for all these other factors that might impact voting preference?

*edit* Or are you saying that comparing the dem/repub breakdown after the fact is a method you use to evaluate the randomness of the sample rather than a tool you think should be used to generate that sample in the first place? */edit*

Hel'n
09-16-2004, 01:08 PM
Polls coming out later...

ROFL

You mean he only has to kick two field goals to tie, and a touchdown to win?

;)

Baby Lee
09-16-2004, 01:10 PM
I would never in a million years vote for GWB. However, I can recognize a professionally run campaign when I see one. Rove may even be better than Carville.
That's a lot of words in your post, but I think the key, even more than the Swifties to the sea change is the comparison of the two candidate's speeches.
The reporting for duty, followed by the salute is as embarassing an image as the bunny suit. So much so, that by the time of Bush's speech, it served as an avatar for the entire speech in the minds of many.
Then Bush walked out and gave an appropriately, in turn, calming, dignified, passionate and compassionate speech that, ONCE AGAIN, quelled the fears of supporters who wondered if he was up to the task and silenced the prejudices of fence-sitters or non-supporters who had been painted an entirely different picture of the guy.
Nothing makes those pictures of Bush as Gollum or Bush as Hitler, or Bush as Alfred E. Neumann, or Bush as Little Lord Fauntleroy, look stupid and sad as the image he presented that night.

Calcountry
09-16-2004, 02:28 PM
Has anyone volunteered on a campaign before? Is there even such a thing? I saw it on Taxi Driver. Remember, I don't live in the real world.
You just keep watching those movies Jenson. :p

Calcountry
09-16-2004, 02:34 PM
If the polls continue trending the way they have in the past month or so he could end up pulling 40 states.

Wouldn't it be fun to watch pinkounderground and this forum if Bush captured about 400 electoral votes? ROFL
Let me tell you about the landscape in California. The conservatives will vote in this election come heck or high water. In my part of the state, no one even talks about Kerry at all. At A's games, all I have seen is Kerry. So its like this. If the Jaz's of this world get depressed to the point that they won't post, talk, cajole, drag those that are in their social spheres to the polls to vote inbetween bong hits, then the turnout of Libs in Cally will be soft. I don't know whether it will be soft enough to overturn the recent massive switch to the D party out here, but given an early Bush romp in the East, the odds are good that the vote will be depressed enough out here to put the state in play.

The polls close in Main, and Pa at 5:00 pacific time. Most have not even commuted the 1.5 hour commute home at that time so by the time they get home they will hear it on the drive time radio. ;) California dreamin for a complete fuggin rout. :thumb: