i'm curious, how many of you see a trend towards bush? i'm just looking to see how many people are just repeating what they heard or are honest enough to say what is really going on. this will be a very close election, probably like 2000, the majority vote won't make a difference in this election.
I see a trend towards Bush, but I have seen one for a few weeks, months. Bush has done bad in the weekend polls for the last month or two, so I don't get worried about those. When he has surged mid-week I didn't get overly confident, because it's just what has happened and he would fall back down the next weekend. Polls don't really mean anything, though. It's all about where they go and what they say. Kerry is campaigning mostly in states Gore won. While only Ohio and Florida are Buah states in trouble. Florida will go Bush. Jeb is very popular, Bush will get more of the Jewish vote, Mel Martinez will bring out even more of the Cuban vote, and the panhandle will get out the vote. Ohio will be close, but Bush will win. The Marriage Amendment is on the ballot and I think the pundits and polls are overlooking that. Bush will take New Mexico, Iowa, and one or more of MN, MI, WI, PA. All won by Gore. It appears to be off the table but I still think Bush could have a chance of taking Oregon, gay marriage is on the ballot there and I think he has a chance. Hawaii being a battleground state now shows a great weakness for Kerry. New Jersey being so close as well. But as far as trends I think Kerry may be getting a little desperate, him yelling "wakeup America" is a little over the top. Polling to see how to reply to the Bin Laden shows a bit of fear. Bush is doing a few things that may be worrisome, but it could also be considered safeguarding. He didn't campaign much in the final days in 2000 and it might have cost him, his schedule for Monday is very busy. Some could say he is worried, but he'll mostly be in Gore states so I'm not sure how accuarte that would be. I just have faith in the American people. When they get ready to vote they'll realize that national security trumps everything. They know who will protect them, even if they don't always agree with some of his tactics or any of his non-defense policies. No poll has Bush below a double-digit lead in the terrorism department and I think most have him with over a 20% lead. That's what matters.
Good analysis. Also, the housewives will overwelmingly go for Bush. When the rubber meets the road, most people are going to vote to save their ass over saving their job.
My gut tells me that Kerry will win, and it won't be as close as the polls suggest. I have no real insight as to why I feel this way, other than the fact that voter turnout will be huge ... and that usually favors the dems. But then again, that feeling in my gut may be nothing more than gas
I was always under the assumption that heavy turnout favored Republicans. I do agree that it will not be close, but it won't be Kerry winning. I don't think there is a possible electoral vote count that can have him winning big. He would have to win FL and OH, plus CO and NV, and a surprise in the South. I think it's gas. :thumb:
Probably true. Republican professional women voted for Bill Clinton twice in the 90's because of the charm factor, not just the housewives. What Limbaugh called the "arousal gap". Also in the debates, CNNfn ran real-time graphs showing approval during the candidates responses. The curves tracked closely for Kerry with the men giving him slightly higher ratings than Bush, but very narrowly with the lines atop each other mostly. Whenever Bush spoke, the men's and women's curves also tracked parallel, but separated by a full point with Bush getting the higher curve. There are a lot of people in this country (maybe half) who will vote for the most likeable fellow, issues be damned. My retired, elderly mother, is appalled by the war, the economy, current health care, . . . almost every Bush policy. But she's probably going to vote for him because " I just don't like Kerry very much". Ol' George is just a lot more like the southern gentlemen she knows than that stiff Yankee who talks too much. The woman has a PhD and has never been a fool, but she isn't worried about losing a job and she isn't worried about dying from terrorists or from anything else. She wants a President that she likes. Women think differently. Well, I'm voting for both. We deserve both and they are not mutually exclusive goals.
Yesterday, I saw a group of Bush supporters on the side of the road, and one of the women had a sign that read, "If you have seen Kerry's plans for Iraq, contact Unsolved Mysteries." All these Kerry supporters are taking a leap of faith - just hoping, hoping that all his unspoken plans are better than Bush's. Kerry can't make a decision, not without making sure its okay with everybody first. And everybody knows that won't go over well fighting terrorism. When people get into those little booths, they are going to realize Bush is a better option. He's not great, but you don't have to be much - to be better than Kerry. I will do my part and vote for Bush, and can only hope that he wins the election.
Obviously you have either not paid much attention to the campaign or you have not made any effort to familiarize yourself with Kerry's plans for handling Iraq and the war on terror. If you think he has no plans, verbally or written, for Iraq then you have tuned his campaign out completely. I am a LOT more comfortable with the prospects of Kerry as commander in chief than I am with Bush when it concerns the war on terror. The best argument Bush supporters have is that no attacks have taken place on US soil since the attacks. Is that directly because of Bush? Probably not. Is it partially because of Bush? Probably so. The truth is that Bush did what ANY president would have done - he went on the offensive to defend our country and it's citizens. People act like he went far and beyond expectations. He has been completely insufficient in his handling of both Afghanistan and Iraq. In Afghanistan he certainly broke up the Taliban regime and introuduced democracy to that country (or did he?). When all is said and done though the goal of capturing or killing Osama was not accomplished. Oh but he has left special forces there..... Yes and three years later what is there to show for it? In Iraq he accomplished major goals such as capturing or killing Saddam and has taken control of most of the country. Yet with elections coming up there in just a few short months there are still lingering rebel strongholds in cities where virtually nothing has been done to stop them. The death toll of US troops has continued to rise and the rate per month has increased over time. His strategy in iraq has created instability there and has created a more terror friendly nation. To me Bush has a problem with going in for the kill, so to speak. Why wrap your hands around someone's throat if you are not going squeeze as hard as you can and go for the jugular? Some people really enjoy wearing their republican or democratic blinders...........
First, I have paid attention. Second, I try to look at everything openly. I don't like Bush. If the democrats had a candidate who was anything close to being a reasonable candidate for president - I would vote for him. I don't agree with several of Bush's policies at home and think a much better job could be done with international policies. The truth is, nothing about Kerry suggests to me that he can do anything any better. In fact, if kerry wins I predict he will lose the next election by a land slide and be forgotten in history as just somebody to replace Bush. And as far as his plans go, what did he keep saying during the debates again? Oh yea, that "Bush only offers more of the same, but my plans are better. It was a mistake for Bush to go into war, but I under me we can win it." I didn't hear a part where he said how he could win it, and I didn't hear a part were he conveyed his plan. I'm not saying he doesn't have a plan, just that he doesn't have a good laid out plan that will actually work already formulated. Or is it just to give our troops the funding they need? I guess its only if it comes from the place Kerry wants it to come from. My roommate is a Marine who will be being deployed for Iraq again in a few months, and trust me, he doesn't give a damn were the money comes from - but they really need it over there.
I can tell you Kerry's plan: Bring in more allies, train the Iraqi troops, make sure the elections are in January, summits. The only problem is that is Bush's plan as well. Not only is it his plan, he has already reached some of the goals. When that fact is brought up Kerry replies "Well I'll do it better". That's not a plan. Why is that? I'm intersted in knowing why. Not me. My best argument is that Kerry doesn't understand the Iraq war, thus doesn't understand the War on Terror. If you don't see the two as one then you have no right being in the Oval Office. General citizens can think what they want, but the President can not be that naive. You mean like that bang up job Clinton did defending us after the first WTC bombing, USS Cole or our embassies? In what ways? Explain. They had elections. Was not accomplished? It will be accomplished. Give our special forces some damn credit. Not tue. The Sunni Triangle is in the process of being broken up. More is getting secured everyday. Why do you think airstikes have increased? It's a war. Good. These people are fighting our brave soldiers and marines instead of planning attacks against us. African Al Qeada groups are in Iraq fighting. We know where Zaraqwi is and what he is doing. What are you referring to? I wish he would just drop the bomb on them. If you think Kerry will or anything similar to that you are seriously mistaken. So you think Kerry is stronger on terrorism? Can you explain why? Was it his vote against the first Gulf War? Was it his oppostion to Reagan during the Cold War? Was it his idea and vote to cut intelligence? Was it his vote to cut defense systems? Is it his oppostition to Star Wars? Was it him calling terrorism an "exaggeration"? Was it him agreeing with Bush about Tora Bora in '02 or was it when he changed his mind in '04? Or was it when he said the War on Terror should be fought like a police opperation?
