How can GWB be leading in the Polls???

The BBQ Pit
41

And yet, it continues.

Half of the Straight Dope liberal conclave are painting Bush supporters as ignorant hicks who could be rescued from their benighted state if they could only be educated, somehow on the issues. Forgetting that I, for one, am pretty well informed on the issues, and wouldn’t vote for John Kerry in a million years.

I came by my political views through years of education and reflection, and it’s an insult to me to say that I’d be a Kerry voter if I were better informed. There is still room in American politics for disagreement. We don’t have a Politburo yet.

The other half is getting ready for their Pauline Kael moment. Kael was a brilliant woman, one of the most influential theater critics of her day. But so isolated was she in her liberal, East Coast sphere that she misread the political mood of the country in 1972, when George McGovern carried only one state.

Kael became a political joke when she exclaimed, “How can this be? Nobody I know voted for Nixon.”

42

Well nobody I know voted for Bush and, man, are we ever paying a price, and just about everywhere I look.

43

For the record: I am not a liberal or conservitive…I vote my consious and nothing else. I never questioned the intellegince of GWB supporters, not once. Although I see it took 4 posts before someone told me to take of my blinders and come out of my hole…nice…dicks. What I want to know, and dont understand, is as MEN if you put GWB and Kerry next to each other and compare careers, ethics, etc…how the HELLLLLLLLL can Bush come out on top???

If GWB was born George W. Smith, he would be the kindly, some what slow, old man we talked to at the corner store. Maybe he would drive the local school bus, or cut the grass ala Forest Gump,…but president?? HAHAHA

I really and truly want to know what is it you see in this man? What inspires you about him? He has no communication skills…so what is it???

44

'Cuz folks is stoopid. I mean, for Christ’s sake, one poll actually showed a majority thought that SADDAM HUSSEIN was responsible for the attack on the WTC. With that kind of abject ignorance, you can pretty much tell 'em anything and they’ll buy it. I’m not saying that every Bush supporter is ignorant, but if ignorant people weren’t allowed to vote, Kerry would win hands down.

45

Bottom line? Kerry’s a weak candidate with ambiguous positions on most of the issues, and he’s done a pretty lame job of campaigning to date. Probably the Dem’s only hope for next November is in the Vice Presidential pick – if Kerry chooses someone that the electorate respects (no, I don’t know who that would be), then he might win.

46

For the record: I am not a liberal or conservative…I vote my conscious and nothing else. I never questioned the intelligence of GWB supporters, not once. Although I see it took 4 posts before someone told me to take of my blinders and come out of my hole…nice…dicks. What I want to know, and dont understand, is as MEN if you put GWB and Kerry next to each other and compare careers, ethics, etc…how the HELLLLLLLLL can Bush come out on top???

If GWB was born George W. Smith, he would be the kindly, some what slow, old man we talked to at the corner store. Maybe he would drive the local school bus, or cut the grass ala Forest Gump,…but president?? HAHAHA

I really and truly want to know what is it you see in this man? What inspires you about him? He has no communication skills…so what is it???

47

But Kerry has the advantage of running against the Bush that we’ve all seen in action for 4 years. Gore couldn’t point out what a fuckup Bush was, because Bush hadn’t been president yet. And I don’t really think Gore “leaned” on the Clinton Administration. If anything, it was a liability for him.

48

This -the American people are stupid argument is bullshit. Remember that Gore won the popular vote in the last election. And Clinton did in two previous elections. So - lib/dem dopers please choose:

The American public was stupid when they voted for Clinton and Gore

or

The American public only recently became stupid - only during the last two years, yeah that’s it they are stupid now because they don’t agree with me.

Stupid.

49

Conveniently overlooked that those other four posts called conservatives stupid eh?

50

Except that Bush’s actions don’t seem to be hurting him any in the political sphere. We have just lived through a month of the most intense criticism the Bush admin has ever received (9-11 commission, Richard Clark, “you owe an apology”, etc.) and still Bush comes out on top.

Your comment is an exact example of what I am trying to say. You try to point at what Bush has done wrong to garner support for Kerry. In order to win you will have to point at what Kerry will do right. And Kerry has yet to have offered anything substantial along those lines.

I agree that Gore didn’t do a lot of leaning on Clinton. Had he drawn Clinton to him rather than pushing him away during the 2000 election Gore could be president today.

51

I don’t know where this “Kerry far less inspiring than Gore” bit came from, but Al Gore c. 2000 was probably the least inspiring man in America. Al Gore 2004, by contrast, has issues, by God, and a beard. Besides, Gore distanced himself from Clinton as much as humanly possible without actually leaving the party. Kerry is using leftover Clinton goodwill far more effectively than Gore did.

Getting a job driving a school bus with a DUI arrest on your record is almost impossible.

No. Clinton isn’t running for President; W is.

athelas, a question: did you watch the press conference? If you did, did you find his performance a little… worrying?

To answer the OP, I once again trot out the old agade- half of the population is dumber than average. I don’t believe that either right or left is more likely to fall into that lower half, but I am extremely convinced that our President does.

You’re looking at this the wrong way. A sizeable portion of America doesn’t care what other countries think, believes the Iraq thing is going well, doesn’t care about whether WMDs exist or not because they aren’t being sent to look for them, and believes the economy is doing well because the pundits say it is.

Plus, they’re still waiting for Bush to appoint an anti-abortion SC justice like he promised to the last time around. That whole anti-gay marriage amendment thing plays well to them, too.

52

I didnt conveniently overlook them, I just didnt care. I was simply talking about what I thought were comments directed at me. If they weren’t, my apologies, if they were, I stand by my earlier comment…dicks.

53

You are looking at this the wrong way. A sizeable portion of America cares more about what the EU thinks than what Americans think, believes that Iraq is as bad as Vietnam, didn’t care whether WMDs existed until they found out that they didn’t, and believes the economy is doing poorly even though it is doing quite well.

54

Well the country ain’t coming out on top, and that should be the point.

55

I think you are missing context. If you look at the polling reports http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm you can see the trending. Also you will note that with a plus/minus error of 4 percent, Bush and Kerry are in a virtual dead heat, and this is all prior to Woodward’s book. The numbers polled are relatively small at 767 likely voters.

More importantly, is the ABC/Post poll, where it is 49/48 Bush/Kerry, until Ralph-fucking-Nader gets involved, where it’s 48/43/6

Also the Zogby poll shows Kerry ahead ( 47/44 ) without Nader and tied ( 45/45 ) with Nader. All of these polls were conducted roughly on the same dates between the 15th -18th

Here’s an interesting one on Iraq http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm , which is not looking good for George, since supposedly foreign policy is his strength

So what does this tell us? Not a damn thing. I no longer trust polls for anything any more. I think that polls are skewed now due primarily to caller ID.

When was the last time you recall a poll being correct?

Me neither.

56

Yeah right, one poll that shows Bush in the lead while others show a statistical tie or Kerry ahead, and the Republicans begin to claim it is over and democrats despair. Both positions are silly considering what the current trend is:

http://www.dailykos.com/

I am trying to figure out why gloating or despairing is merited so early in the election year, Only one thing is clear so far: 50 million dollars spent already and at best, Bush has only parity to show.

57

I would think the reason Bush is ahead is clear. Liberals haven’t done a good enough job in calling anyone who disagrees with them “stupid”.

Anyone who supports Bush is stupid, and all that is necessary is that you point this out a few more times.

Anyone who supports Nader is also stupid, and the best way to change their mind is to call them “stupid” for handing the election to Bush.

Pretty simple, yes?

You can’t beat something with nothing. Kerry is an empty suit. The only thing he has offered, the only thing he has to offer, is that he isn’t Bush.

And that does not resonate with the average voter. I know you would really like it to be. I know that you feel very, very strongly that it should. But it doesn’t. And therefore, unless Kerry comes up with some new ideas, some kind of plausible alternative,

He. Will. Lose.

And then I will sit back and savor the foam-flecked howls that will cripple the hamsters for months afterward.

HumptysHamhole and Mr. Moto hit it exactly. The Left on the SDMB is badly, horribly out of touch with the American political reality. And screaming doesn’t change that.

It is not yet a slam-dunk for Bush. I still think he will win by only 2-3%, although the margin in the Electoral College will greatly exceed that. But the trends for the Democrats are not good, and their standard-bearer Kerry shows no sign of life.

Never change a winning game; always change a losing one. Kerry is losing. Can he change? I doubt it.

The Left is losing. Will they change? No chance in hell.

Hee hee hee.

Regards,
Shodan

(whimpering, pathetic voice) IzzyR - please, please, please - STAY!!!

58

Uh, no… that would be you paying the price for re-electing Blair. It isn’t like Bush held him at gunpoint and said, “Okay, I’m going to go invade Iraq, and you’re going to give me the Royal Marines and your full public support.”

Well, it might be, but I doubt it.

59

How badly out of touch could we be if Bush is only going to win by 2 or 3 per cent, exactly?

60

**LIBERAL VOICE: How is it this man is even in the campaign still?!?

CONSERVATIVE VOICE: Hah! This is your hatred of all those who disagree with you coming home to roost! You should have been nicer, you fucktard!!**
People, people, people. Let us keep a few things in mind here.

First, the GOP is winding down an ad campaign in the key battleground states where the election will be won or lost. They have swamped the airwaves with withering negative ads about John Kerry pretty much since he clinched the Democratic nomination at the beginning of March. The ad buys totaled roughly $40 million. But here’s the thing: The ads didn’t move the poll numbers all that much. Here’s an LA Times article from last week about this ad blitz. From the article (registration required):

Second, as talkingpointsmemo.com notes, the CNN and Washington Post/ABC polls showing a slight lead for Dubya are only two of ten polls conducted this month, and of those eight other polls, only one shows Dubya ahead. Yeah, seven out of ten polls show Kerry ahead, if slightly. One wonders why the news was slanted the other way. Well, that’s for another thread.
It’s a long race, people. And Kerry hasn’t really gotten started–which might be a euphemism for "Kerry hasn’t found an easily digestible message, hasn’t come close to matching Dubya’s fundraising, and has to learn to get past the whole ‘I’m a Senator, not the butler from ‘The Addams Family’’ thing.

Personally, I’d like to see him call Dubya on his plan for Iraq, which to my mind consists of staring into the camera with a steely glint, saying “We’re staying the course, people, and don’t you dare question me how, the turnover happens June 30 because I need soldiers to stand next to during the Fourth of July parades.” OK, I jest, but why can’t Kerry just say, “The president has no idea what to do, and for this I question the judgment and capabilities of the present administration.” What’s so hard about that?