Nwcoflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 701 posts, RR: 13
Reply 3, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1691 times:
Kerry is slightly ahead in Florida, however, I don't believe what the polls say. They are not even that effective until around October. Wait until the debates, to see what happens in Iraq and other important things. Americans are quick to change their minds. 1 Week in politics can easily change an entire election.
NDSchu777 From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 419 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1687 times:
Florida isn't dominated by any one party. Just as the 2000 election proved, the state is very split down the middle and just like it was 4 years ago, it will be one of the states deciding the election. Not only is the state practically split 50-50, it also is the 4th most populous state in the country and has a lot of electoral votes as to why Kerry and Bush are focusing a lot of their campaigning there. Texas is a very Republican-dominated state, almost as much as Massachusetts is for the Democrats. But Florida could very easily go either way.
Rjpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1630 times:
Especially in Florida, a handful of swing voters could change who wins the state. There really is no way to predict who will win until something big happens--Debates, Iraq, Osama captured, who knows.
Bush has been catering to the Cuban and Jewish vote in Florida--These coulld make or break the election in such close states.
If Bush team were to move the US embassy to Jerusalem, I predict he'd get a few percentage bump among Jewish voters....This could do it. Not too sure what he could do to get whatever Cuban vote he doesn't have already.
B757300 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4114 posts, RR: 21
Reply 10, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1627 times:
I've heard on the radio this morning that Bush would be crushed if the election was today. Is that true?
Depends on which poll you decide to listen too. Gallup has the President ahead. The LA Slimes, Newsweak, and See-BS News have Kerry ahead. However, you look at the internals of those three polls, all over sampled Democrats by 10%-15%. Gallup's last poll had something like .7% more Republicans but that is insignificant regardless of party.
As for the two FlorDUH polls showing Kerry ahead, the one by ARG over sampled Democrats by 8% (as they always seem too) and the Quinnipiac University Poll will not show the respondent breakdown by number of Democrats, Republicans, and Independent/Other.
The pollster with the best track record with state polls is Mason-Dixon while Gallup usually does the best nationally.
Polls to ignore are any done by Democrat or Republican polling firms, ARG, Zogby, Rasmussen, LA-Times, See-BS News, and Newsweek. Democrat and Republican polls for obvious reasons, ARG usually slants to Democrats, Zogby now does many of his poll online which makes them highly suspect regardless of results, Rasmussen has a very poor track record, and LA-Time, See-BS News, and Newsweak also have been producing polls that have a large bias toward Democrats.
Northwest717 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 1600 times:
I'd like to disagree on the statement of Plains states being very conservative. Here in Madison it is more than liberal. This cities name should be changed to Liberal City, LOL. To tell the truth I have no problem with it. I like liberal people. They tend to be more peaceful and more freethinking.
On the topic of Presidents, well I think BUsh is a good person and all, but I think he stinks as a president. I don't think Kerry is much better though. I am so glad I can't vote yet. I wouldn't know who to go for, "Mr. Indecision" or "Mr. Next-Time-I-Invade-A-Country-I-Hope-They-Really-Have-MDWs" I personally liked Clark. Openminded, freethinking, and peaceful. The last thing this country needs is to invade every single country under the sun. If Bush stayed in office forever, by 2020 we would be invading Canada for crying out loud. Like I said, I think Mr. Bush is a terrific person, but I don't think he is fit to be president. I think Kerry is a brave and great person, but I don't think he has the stability to be president. I guess only time will tell.
Ok, all you Bush fans, go ahead, tear me to shreds.
PROSA From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 5644 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1594 times:
Polls at this stage of the race mean very little. Bush is likely to get a bump from the Republican National Convention at the end of this month. Kerry will benefit if the national employment reports released in September and October were as weak as the most recent one. Developments in Iraq can help or hurt either candidate; it seems as if the pace of U.S. casaulties has slowed recently, which will help Bush. Another terrorist attack - which I consider highly unlikely - probably would help Bush, unless intelligence failures are blamed. In short, things can go either way for either candidate.
"Let me think about it" = the coward's way of saying "no"
Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1586 times:
It's perverted to talk about how a terror attack could help, hurt someone, but I guess it's the reality of the times.
If the attack takes place within two weeks of the election, the American people-including myself (vote NOT included) will rally around the President, and he will get a bump up from it.
If it would happen, say, the first week of October, however, the bump will have time to settle, and, rightly or wrongly, people may start to say that "hey, Bush said we were safer....", and it could actually hurt him.
Either way, the election will be tight, I believe, and an attack COULD help determine the outcome of the election.
Luisca From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1564 times:
To answer someones question above, Kerry is winnig the cuban vote for Bush, He has a long history of opposing the Embargo on Cuba. Me and my whole family feel in Florida (miami at least) that Bush will win, but I am a little concerned about some 10K portoricans that moved to the orlando area a few years ago, they tend to vote Democratic.
AvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2479 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1562 times:
"I think, in my gut, though, that this election, if possible, could be closer than the last one. A real possibility that the "winner" will lose the popular vote, again, be it Kerry or Bush."
Amen to this, Alpha1 and we'd again have Mr. Nader to thank though, as before with Gore, I'd think he'd hurt Kerry most. As to the possibility of another terror attack, I'm not sure who it would help most, there are a lot of things to consider, not the least of which would be a declaration from bin Laden stating that the new attack was a direct response to U.S. actions in Iraq. If that were the motivation, I'm not sure a new attack would help Bush. Also on that subject, I'd like to go out on a limb and postulate that the Republican National Convention, much more than the Democratic one, seems to me likely to be a prime target for a 9/11 followup attack. Being in NYC, which we've heard OBL wants to hit again and that fact that it's (in OBL's viewpoint) the hated Bush's official coronation to run again. I think if I were bin Laden, I'd make this convention a priority target, despite the security. Perhaps I should've made this a separate thread, well, I don't mind if someone else does. I know I don't want to be anywhere near NYC while it's going on. Anyone else very worried about this?