Gore in '04: What's the problem?

[december]

*Originally posted by Tejota *Bush’s re-election numbers (i.e. approval of him in particular, rather than the idea of the presidency). are low. He could win a plurality with those numbers if he ran against two strong candidates. But he can’t beat any single challengers unless his number come up. Hell, Bush won’t even win the nomination unless no-one runs against him for it.

I find all this surprising. Can you supply some cites?

[SmackFu]

This site has a ton of polling numbers regarding re-election, presumably most of what’s out there. In my reading, they don’t back up what Tejota’s saying. Bush would beat any Democratic challenger according to those polls.

[Lemur866]

Yes, if Bush is paired against a hypothetical democrat today, 2 years and change before the election, he comes up a winner. But of course, these polls are meaningless. Bush currently has very high name recognition, while the democratic field (aside from Gore and Lieberman) are pretty much unknowns to most people.

And I just love how high Al Sharpton’s name is! Of course Al Sharpton isn’t going anywhere near the democratic nomination. Heh heh. What those numbers mean is that the Democratic primary is wide open. It could easily be that the Ds will wind up nominating a dark horse. Who outside of Arkansas had heard of Bill Clinton 2 years before the 92 election? But the Democratic primary process will bring the candidates exposure. People barely know who Tom Daschle is, so how can they decide if they would vote for him vs Bush?

Bush is high in the polls right now. In 04 he will be either higher or lower or the same, but his standing in the polls right now is pretty much irrelevant.

[Shodan]

I see your Sore-Looserman and raise you a Bush-Cheated. Sore-Looserman lost a lot of it’s sting when it turned out that Gore didn’t act like a sore looser after SCOTUS ruled.

Well, he didn’t attempt a coup, if that is what you mean. After the highest court in the land rules, what other choice did he have?

It was the stalling for a month beforehand which rather stuck in my craw.

Now we have his recent speech, which was rather long on “everything Bush has done to date is wrong” and rather short on “instead, I would have done thus and so”. If he has ideas to add to the mix, let’s hear them. If you are just going to carp, that sounds bitter. Understandable, but not helpful.

But we now know for a fact that Bush cheated, while a the time, it was just a suspicion.

Did you mean “cheated” in the sense of “won fair and square under the rules as they had been agreed on in advance”, or “cheated” in the sense of breaking some law?

Because you really do need to produce a cite.

Regards,
Shodan

[SmackFu]

That’s all true Lemur866. But Tejota said “But he can’t beat any single challengers unless his number come up.” Which is not true, based on the polls I posted.

[vanilla]

I don’t think Lieberman has a chance myself.
Oh, I agree with him on a lot of things, but there is unfortunatley still too much anti-semitism, even in America now.
No One would be able to think he could be impartial on the mid-east problems.