View Full Version : Time to Call the Election
Roguish Lawyer
10-28-2004, 16:07
OK, ladies and gentlemen, the Election is Tuesday. Time for predictions. This is a public poll, so your answer will be viewable for all to see. Popular vote only in this one. Vote soon, because the poll stays open only 48 hours.
Sacamuelas
10-28-2004, 17:19
Since I wanted to actually post my true prediction... (Bush 4-6.99)
I'll just have to improvise. :D
SHUT UP, RL!
Bush 52%
Kerry 47%
Nader 1%
BTW I made this prediction two weeks ago.
brownapple
10-28-2004, 19:00
Popular Vote, Bush by 5-10%
But let us not forget that it is not the popular vote that elects the President. Electoral Vote will be much more one sided in my opinion... Bush will break 300.
Pick 7-10, concur with Greenhat on the electoral.
rubberneck
10-28-2004, 20:10
This could get very interesting if the exit polls show Bush winning Fl, Pa, Oh and a suprising win in NJ he could go on to win Or, WA and Hi as Kerry voters on the left coast realize that their guy has lost and stay home.
When you get right down to it Bush has Kerry on the ropes in more states that went for Gore than vice versa. I would not be suprised if Bush not only won the popular vote by 10% but runs away with the electoral college.
Most of the recent poll internals show that a vast majority of Bush supporters are voting for Bush while a large percentage of Kerry "supporters" indicated their vote is more anti-Bush than pro-Kerry (in one poll with was close to 40% of Kerry supporters). One has to wonder how many of those Kerry supporters will either stay home because they don't feel comfortable about either, not cast a ballot for either Presidential candidate or go with Bush. I highly doubt that Bush will suffer any last minute defections. I can't say the same for Kerry.
I am almost tempted to say that you will see the various pundits scratching their heads at the size of the Bush victory. Either way this will be an election that will be studied for years to come.
rubberneck
10-28-2004, 20:18
I just finished reading this and thought it dovetailed nicely with what I was trying to say in my pervious post.
Kerry unable to crack Bush base
October 28, 2004
BY ROBERT NOVAK SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST Advertisement
Pollster John Zogby surprised the political world back in April with a long-range prediction that John Kerry would defeat George W. Bush for president. On Monday this week, Zogby told me, he changed his mind. He now thinks the president is more likely to be re-elected because he has reinforced support from his base, including married white women.
That conclusion would be a surprise for frantically nervous Republicans and cautiously upbeat Democrats entering the campaign's final days. In fact, nobody, including Zogby and all the other polltakers, can be sure who will win this election. Yet, it is clear that President Bush's strategists have succeeded in solidifying his base to a degree that makes it much harder to defeat him next Tuesday.
The long, tortuous presidential contest has come down to who the ''security mom'' thinks can best protect her family against terrorism. Based on current polling data, Bush has won that argument in the face of Kerry's relentless attacks. That explains why the Democrat this week was not talking about health care or other standby issues of his party, but was trying to pierce Bush's security shield by harping on the disappearance of munitions in Iraq.
The difficulty that Kerry now encounters has been shrouded by misleading overnight tracking from last weekend, showing a Democratic surge that is common in Friday-through-Sunday polling. Otherwise, Kerry is in trouble. When Zogby had second thoughts Monday, he found Bush with a national lead of three percentage points and an undecided vote of only 2.7 percent.
The data shows the undecided voters in Bush's base are resolving their misgivings about the president. Zogby's subgroups in the Republican base -- such as investors, military and married couples -- are returning to Bush.
Zogby shows Kerry's advantage among women is only 3 percentage points, the same margin reflected in nightly tracking by Republican pollster Ed Goeas. The Goeas poll shows a 13-percentage-point Bush advantage among men. Goeas' poll has white men favoring Bush over Kerry, 58 percent to 35 percent. Remarkably, the count among white married women is not far behind: 53 percent for Bush, 42 percent for Kerry. The problem for the Democrats is Bush's continued large lead over Kerry concerning which candidate voters prefer to fight terrorism.
If these numbers hold up, the campaign strategy of Bush political adviser Karl Rove will be vindicated. While Kerry's strategy seems to have a thousand fathers, no presidential campaign in my experience has been so completely in the hands of one man as Bush's. Amid much private criticism in GOP ranks, Rove has concentrated on mobilizing the base behind Bush as the anti-terror candidate rather than making conventional overtures to undecided centrists.
With his base secure this week, the Bush strategy did turn to Democratic voters -- not with the usual leftward turn but appealing to hard-liners who have trouble accepting Kerry leading the war against terror. Campaigning in Wisconsin Tuesday, Bush invoked the memory of Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry Truman and John F. Kennedy for their ''resolve in times of war and in hours of crisis'' -- drawing an unfavorable comparison with Kerry. Bush is after the security moms, Republican or Democrat.
On the same day, the Kerry campaign threw out previous plans and made the candidate's centerpiece a New York Times report of 380 tons of explosives found missing from Iraq. Although NBC embedded reporters said the explosives were gone when U.S. troops arrived in March 2003, Kerry insisted for two days that this was another example of Bush's inadequacy in waging the war on terror. Whether such a complex issue appeals to security moms is another matter.
A lot can happen in the next few days. In 2000, Zogby had Bush 3percentage points ahead at this stage, but Al Gore seized the lead because of the attack on Social Security privatization and the revelation of Bush's drunken-driving case.
Kerry needs what he has been unable to accomplish so far: a direct hit on Bush's anti-terrorism credentials. It is hard to imagine a Democratic victory without removing those security moms from under Bush's anti-terrorism banner.
On the same day, the Kerry campaign threw out previous plans and made the candidate's centerpiece a New York Times report of 380 tons of explosives found missing from Iraq. Although NBC embedded reporters said the explosives were gone when U.S. troops arrived in March 2003, Kerry insisted for two days that this was another example of Bush's inadequacy in waging the war on terror. Whether such a complex issue appeals to security moms is another matter.
[/I]
Aaaand we all know how well that is working out for him. Misleading reports and all. The man doesn't have a clue.
Good article rubberneck.
I've seen recent polls from Ohio going for kerry at an avg of 1.2%.
Roguish Lawyer
10-28-2004, 20:43
I just got to answer a telephone poll that obviously was sponsored by my beloved Barbara Boxer. The last question was my political party, and my response was "Can you guess?" LOL
I voted absentee already.
rubberneck
10-28-2004, 20:52
I've seen recent polls from Ohio going for kerry at an avg of 1.2%.
You have to be very careful when looking at polls as they all use a unique and archane set of statistical forumla's tp determine the difference between a likely voter and a registered voter. Also keep in mind that the republican's got caught flat footed in 2000 and have spent the last 4 years building grass roots programs to get out the vote in battleground states like Oh, Pa, Fl, Mi, Wi, Mn, Ia... If they had been this prepared in '00 Bush would have killed Gore. IMHO, barring a gross case of voter fraud by the dems Bush will carry OH, not by much but he will carry it none the less. Also bare in mind that the people attacted to Bush are the sort of people who actually follow thorugh on voting.
Radar Rider
10-29-2004, 00:08
I have previously forecast President Bush to win by 56% to 44% (whether that amount goes to sKerry or that Communist Party guy, the one that is at least honest enough to call himself a Communist :D).
I may be a little over optimistic, but I'm sure that W will get 4 more years. :)
Bravo1-3
10-29-2004, 00:42
Kerry needs to win Ohio, but the PResident is pretty much going to live there, and to top it off, the President doesn't actually NEED to win Ohio to still win the election. Kerry actually MUST win Ohio, or he's done on the Red/Blue chart.
Hawaii is leaning to Bush within the margin of error... surely this is a sign of the impending apocalypse, whatwith the lunar eclipse last night and all.
Still, I'm going Bush with 54% of the popular vote. I just don't seethis not going to court in Ohio.
I just got back from the local DNC "Poll Watcher" volunteer meeting... they ivited me since I'm on the mailing list. Interesting stuff to saythe least. They're scared, very very scared, and that makes me happy.
Shark Bait
10-29-2004, 08:49
LOL!!! Gotta love it! Nobody here, so far, thinks Kerry will win. God, I love this site! No tree hugging, pole smoking, liberal butt monkeys here!!! I sure as hell hope we are all right about it! :lifter
Roguish Lawyer
10-29-2004, 09:22
No tree hugging, pole smoking, liberal butt monkeys here!!!
Well, there are a couple. :eek:
BTW, great screen name! ;)
rubberneck
10-29-2004, 10:29
Drudge is reporting that the Pentagon is going to hold a press conference later today, at which a Major with the 101st will explain how he and his men were tasked with and completed a mission to secure and remove nearly 200 tons of the supposedly missing explosives from Al Qa Qaa. Since Kerry has attached his star to this bogus charge he either has to charge that the Major is a liar or that he was hood winked by the press. Either way he is going to look like a dope that he is over the last few days before the election. There is no way the national media can sweep this one under the rug. Stick a fork in him.....
Anyone else appreciate the happenstance of the name of the storage site, and the fact that Kerry is using it to spread more BS? :)
Anyone else appreciate the happenstance of the name of the storage site, and the fact that Kerry is using it to spread more BS? :)
LMAO! The latest on talk radio in Chicago, couple of the hosts on a GREAT morning show were discussing going to get a NYT so they could see what skerry will talk about today. :D
rubberneck, been listening to some of the press conference with the good Major.
As Air would say... Good times. Adios skerry.
Shark Bait
10-29-2004, 11:17
Well, there are a couple. :eek:
BTW, great screen name! ;)
Thanks, it accurately describes how I felt on many SCUBA ops, even though I never saw a shark.
Goggles Pizano
10-29-2004, 14:30
Razor-yes I caught it and smile everytime one of the talking heads mentions it with a serious face. Must be the "kid" in this old fart! OR it's because I'm up to my armpits in diapers with a new addition. :D
I concur with Greenhat's assesment. My gut tells me Kerry takes a nosedive. I cannot believe that the honest to God, decent, hardworking people of this country buy into the liberal argument that the country is going to hell in a handbasket. Beside which after three debates, and two years of bashing POTUS for everything under the sun, Kerry STILL has not explained what his grand plan is for the country! "Joe Snuffy" will see through that.
Achilles
10-29-2004, 14:53
Most college aged people use cell phones only. That prohibits pollsters from being able to poll them. A large majority of these college aged people don't know anything except what MTV and Puff Daddy tell them, and most of them will vote skerry. So I'd say its Bush by between 2 and 3 %. I already voted, but in Texas, it doesn't really matter.
Roguish Lawyer
11-03-2004, 00:09
Bump. :)
The Reaper
11-03-2004, 10:46
Where is our token favorite lib, who predicted a Kerry victory?
Congrats to 504PIR, Achilles, Bravo1-3, FILO, goat, mffjm8509, NousDefionsDoc, scotts, and Urocyon, unless absentee and provisional ballots significantly change the numbers.
TR
I think the flaming liberals are in the process of crawling back into the holes from which they came. I went to Starbucks today - there were alot of them crying in their non-fat decaf soy chai this morning!
Driving through Minneapolis/St. Paul on the 1st and 2nd I saw dirty lib's on street corners waving kerry sign's. Wonder if they are in such a good mood today. :D
Reaching these goals will require the broad support of Americans. So today I want to speak to every person who voted for my opponent: To make this nation stronger and better I will need your support, and I will work to earn it. I will do all I can do to deserve your trust. A new term is a new opportunity to reach out to the whole nation. We have one country, one Constitution and one future that binds us. And when we come together and work together, there is no limit to the greatness of America.
just words?
Bravo1-3
11-03-2004, 16:12
just words?
Here's what we have to look forward to:
The DNC got its ass handed to them in a paper bag. Not just in the Presidential election, but in the House and Senate too. This should tell them that they are too far left for most people, but it won't. I’m betting they won’t get it at all.
We can now look forward to a far more bitter, vitriolic, and divisive DNC than we have ever seen.
When Carter and Clinton won, you didn’t hear squat about “Let’s heal old wounds” out of the Democrats. Far from it. The Dems are talking out their asses when they say they want to make nice, and the GOP should make nice too. On January 6, 2005 (the day the new Congress is installed) President Bush could propose 100% federally funded universal healthcare with no restrictions, a guarantee of a college education, a guarantee of a job, and every other piece of DNC legislation in the pile… and the DNC will be hyper critical of it. Not just hyper-critical, but nasty about it too.
Case in point: Look at wanna-be Democrat Governor Gregoire’s (Republican Dino Rossi looks like he might have pulled it off at this moment) healthcare plan. It IS Bush’s plan to allow pooling. You’ve got our esteemed Senator Patty Murray (don’t even get me started on this DNC freakazoid) saying it’s a great idea for Washington State (since it’s Ms. Gregoire’s plan), but at the same time, saying that Bush’s plan is crap. IT’S THE SAME PLAN… yet all you hear around here is how Bush’s plan is the worst idea ever created.
It’s not up to the Republicans to reach across the aisle. It’s up to the Democrats to do it. But I don’t believe they’re bright enough as a party to figure that out.
rubberneck
11-03-2004, 18:50
The DNC got its ass handed to them in a paper bag. Not just in the Presidential election, but in the House and Senate too. This should tell them that they are too far left for most people, but it won't. I’m betting they won’t get it at all.
We can now look forward to a far more bitter, vitriolic, and divisive DNC than we have ever seen.
This IMHO represents the largest problem facing the modern democratic party. The last two election ('02 and '04) have gone very very poorly for the Democrats. The American people are telling the Demorcats that they are out of touch with the values that are most important to them. If they don't get their heads out of their collective arses and starting addressing some of those concerns the next election will turn out even worse for them.
I read today that the odds on favorites for the Democratic nomination in '08 are Clinton and Edwars. Have these people learned nothing in the past 2 years? What they really need is a moderate candidate who is willing to reject the 20% of people that embrace moral positions that 80% of American's disagree with (Gay Marriage). For all the talk in the liberal media about how arrogant the President is by "imposing his moral values on the rest of us" they actually miss the real arrogance, which is willingness of a few to impose their beliefs on a majority of Americans.
I see no real hope for the Democratic party in the next 5-10 years unless the unscrew themselves might quickly. If John Kerry, Howard Dean, John Edwards, Dennis Kucinich, Al Sharpton and Carol Mosley Brown is the very best they can do than they have no hope.
just words?
Hmm...did you think Kerry's words were "just words"?
Bravo1-3
11-03-2004, 20:33
[B]I see no real hope for the Democratic party in the next 5-10 years unless the unscrew themselves might quickly.
They don't have that long. They'r going to be the "Party of the State Legislatures" if they are not making real gains by 2008. 2006 will be somethng to see. We need to have Ed Guillespi Sainted or something... :lifter
The Reaper
11-03-2004, 20:47
just words?
Would you prefer some government handouts?
Perhaps some meaningless, feel-good legislation, like a new Assault Weapons Ban?
Just admit you were wrong, and move on.
TR
Airbornelawyer
11-03-2004, 20:49
They don't have that long. They'r going to be the "Party of the State Legislatures" if they are not making real gains by 2008. 2006 will be somethng to see. We need to have Ed Guillespi Sainted or something... :lifter
I'm not sure of the exact number (52-53), but the GOP controls a majority of the 99 state legislatures.
Bravo1-3
11-03-2004, 21:11
I'm not sure of the exact number (52-53), but the GOP controls a majority of the 99 state legislatures.
You learn something new every day! :D
... I thought about what I wrote here as I posted it. Never mind.
the DNC will be hyper critical of it. Not just hyper-critical, but nasty about it too.
Case in point: Look at wanna-be Democrat Governor Gregoire’s (Republican Dino Rossi looks like he might have pulled it off at this moment) healthcare plan. It IS Bush’s plan to allow pooling. You’ve got our esteemed Senator Patty Murray (don’t even get me started on this DNC freakazoid) saying it’s a great idea for Washington State (since it’s Ms. Gregoire’s plan), but at the same time, saying that Bush’s plan is crap. IT’S THE SAME PLAN… yet all you hear around here is how Bush’s plan is the worst idea ever created.
President Bush's healthcare plan has more details than wanna-be Governor Rossi's. All three plans include an agreement that government and small businesses should work together to bring down the costs. Its a good idea.. small business will be able to provide health insurance.
Also in agreement is the reduction of frivolous lawsuits. That is where Mr. Rossi's plan ends. NO OTHER POINTS.
POTUS and Gregoire also agree that a form of unified medical records is desirable.
I wouldnt say its complete crap, but I dont agree with the president's approach of banning research and banning drugs from Canada, and his HSA idea sounds alot like Flexible Spending accounts, which already exists.
I am particularly intruiged by Gregoire's idea of insurance standards for early screening and disease management. Also her idea that the state can pool together with other states to bring down drug costs. POTUS wants to give a billion dollars to groups (eg faith based initiative) to connect uninsured children with SCHIP programs. Thats great, but Gregoire is going to ask for federal "handout" to go into the SCHIP program as well. The other good point that Gregoire brings up is that large corporations have been found trying to get state subsidies by sending their employees to Basic Health, rather than insuring them.
It’s not up to the Republicans to reach across the aisle. It’s up to the Democrats to do it. But I don’t believe they’re bright enough as a party to figure that out.
that must be a rhetorical statement.
Bravo1-3
11-04-2004, 00:23
that must be a rhetorical statement.
No, it is not. When you're party is losing seat after seat after seat at all levels of government, it is not because the other side has a better propaganda machine. It is because the electorate identifies more closely to the party they are giving the seats to.
To assume the GOP needs to suddenly change tack or compromise because the other side doesn't have sufficient influence is an illogical conclusion. Why change what works for them? If the majority puts someone in office at any given level, repeatedly, then for the majority office holder to shift left on single issues when they do not need to is failing to represent their constituency. The minority office holders need to compromise on single issue items, and even certain partisan platforms if they don't match the majority of their constituents beliefs. This is where the Democrats get it wrong time after time after time. The party leadership SAYS it's willing to work with the other side, but it is a disingenuous claim at best most of the time. They're so focused on the 20% that makes up their core, they forget about everyone else and basically coerce or cajole them into accepting the platform.
It seems there are more than a few Democrats in both houses of Congress who realize that they're going nowhere... quickly, and while not changing parties, are preparing to cross party lines on many issues. This will have the effect of bringing their representation more in keeping with the national constituency of the party, and not just the fringes.
I hear tell that the next Senator in line for Minority Leader is a guy the Majority can probably work with. If that is so, then more power to him... but then, seeing the way the Democrats do things, I'm willing to bet they'll skip over him and pick some socialist idealogue like they did with Pelosi in the house.
Radar Rider
11-04-2004, 02:38
just words?
Negative. That is a demonstration of the difference between the two candidates. President Bush believes that and means it when he says it. The opponent is the one that would say it and not mean it.
No, it is not. When you're party is losing seat after seat after seat at all levels of government, it is not because the other side has a better propaganda machine. It is because the electorate identifies more closely to the party they are giving the seats to.
I happen to believe that redistricting is a problem. Proportional representation is a good idea.
As for the core party beliefs being "20%", I think it's too ironic to discuss mandate and what it means to the parties at this moment.
Negative. That is a demonstration of the difference between the two candidates. President Bush believes that and means it when he says it. The opponent is the one that would say it and not mean it.
Thank you.