Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Bush gets post-Convention bounce

Election 2004 GW Bush Post Convention Bounce

  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

#1 HubcapDave

HubcapDave

    Bald is Beautiful!

  • Islander
  • 1,333 posts

Posted 03 September 2004 - 07:28 PM

http://story.news.ya...gn_time_poll_dc

Looks like W got the bounce Kerry wished he had!

Quote

NEW YORK (Reuters) - President Bush (news - web sites), winning strong support for his handling of the war on terrorism, has taken a double-digit lead over Democratic challenger John Kerry (news - web sites), according to a Time poll released on Friday.


#2 Ogami

Ogami
  • Islander
  • 2,976 posts

Posted 03 September 2004 - 07:57 PM

Time magazine's poll gives Bush an 11 point lead over Kerry from this convention.

Very bad news considering Kerry got zero bounce from his convention. (And even went down in one poll, as I remember.)

As I predicted many months ago, the Democrats are starting to realize they hitched their cart to the wrong horse.

Kerry was not only Dukasis' lieutenant governor, he is going to be 'Dukakis 2004'.

It's not too late to revoke Kerry and replace him with someone else, as the Democrats did illegally in New Jersey when they replaced Bob Torricelli with Frank 'the Lout' Lautenberg, after the legal state deadline had passed.

Somewhere in her dark New York den, Hillary Clinton smiles and laughs, all proceeds according to plan... With a Kerry failure certain, she is ready for 2008. Stir that cauldron, Hillary!

-Ogami

#3 Nick

Nick

    ...

  • Islander
  • 7,130 posts

Posted 03 September 2004 - 08:16 PM

It's still a long way 'till November, good sir . . . much can still happen! :p

But now that the posing and primping of the conventions is basically over and primary season has ended . . . This is when the election's really gunna start heating up.

There are *a lot* of undecided voters out there and it still can *easily* go either way.

Although, I stand by the very common prediction about this election:  No matter who wins--it isn't gunna be by a wide margin.  Certainly not by a factor as large as 11%.

But I have to admit--as much as it would disappoint me to see Bush re-elected, the thought of a possible Hillary vs. McCain ticket in 2008 has a certain appeal . . . and LOL at the Cauldron line . . . silly Republican. :p

;)

-Nick

#4 Rov Judicata

Rov Judicata

    Crassly Irresponsible and Indifferent

  • Islander
  • 15,720 posts

Posted 03 September 2004 - 08:19 PM

More context:

http://www.talkingpo...8_29.php#003425

Quote

Time Magazine's poll of likely voters, conducted over the course of the convention: Bush 52%, Kerry 41%, Nader 3%. Zogby, over the same period and also of likely voters, Bush 46%, Kerry 44%. ARG, covering through Wednesday Sept. 1st, also among likely voters, Bush 48%, Kerry 47%.

It's pretty clear that Bush has a legitimate lead, both nationally and in the electoral college. Until we get another poll, however, I'm betting Time is simply an outlier. Even if you conduct the poll perfectly you'll get a result that's outside the margin of error simply due to bad luck 5% of the time.

Edited by Hotspur Rovinski, 03 September 2004 - 08:20 PM.

St. Louis must be destroyed!

Me: "I have a job and five credit cards and am looking into signing a two year lease.  THAT MAKES ME OLD."
Josh: "I don't have a job, I have ONE credit card, I'm stuck in a lease and I'm 28! My mom's basement IS ONE BAD DECISION AWAY!"
~~ Josh, winning the argument.

"Congress . . . shall include every idiot, lunatic, insane person, and person non compos mentis[.]" ~1 U.S.C. 1, selectively quoted for accuracy.

#5 Bouree57

Bouree57
  • Islander
  • 578 posts

Posted 03 September 2004 - 09:56 PM

Ogami, on Sep 3 2004, 07:55 PM, said:

It's not too late to revoke Kerry and replace him with someone else, as the Democrats did illegally in New Jersey when they replaced Bob Torricelli with Frank 'the Lout' Lautenberg, after the legal state deadline had passed.

Somewhere in her dark New York den, Hillary Clinton smiles and laughs, all proceeds according to plan... With a Kerry failure certain, she is ready for 2008. Stir that cauldron, Hillary!
I have to wonder what the polls would tell us if we switched the candidates around. John Edwards for President and John Kerry for Vice-President. Now that might actually make a difference.

Tee hee. . . cauldron.  :hehe:

-- B
My words but a whisper, your deafness a shout!
I may make you feel but I can't make you think.
(from Thick as a Brick, Jethro Tull)

He who made kittens put snakes in the grass.
He's a lover of life but a player of pawns.
(from Bungle in the Jungle--War Child, JT)

#6 Caretaker

Caretaker
  • Islander
  • 1,741 posts

Posted 04 September 2004 - 01:15 PM

We'll see how long Bush's "bounce" lasts.  It depends on the domestic policy now.   And whether people actually buy the "compassionate conservative" concept this time around.

#7 darthsikle

darthsikle
  • Dead account
  • 2,139 posts

Posted 04 September 2004 - 03:20 PM

All polls are just indicators of the popular vote, which as we know, as no bearing on an election
Goodbye.

#8 Rov Judicata

Rov Judicata

    Crassly Irresponsible and Indifferent

  • Islander
  • 15,720 posts

Posted 04 September 2004 - 05:13 PM

Hotspur Rovinski, on Sep 3 2004, 06:17 PM, said:

Until we get another poll, however, I'm betting Time is simply an outlier.
http://www.pollingre...com/wh04gen.htm

Newsweek got 52-41. It looks like Time was right. I'm absolutely gobsmacked. We'll see whether it sticks.

darthsikle: For something that keeps track of the electoral college, two sites I advocate:

A pro-Kerry site: http://electoral-vote.com/
A pro-Bush site: http://www.electionp...ctions2004.html

Respectively:

Quote

Kerry 252   Bush 270
Kerry 254 Bush 284

[I happen to think that the latter site's methodology is better, as it averages the last 3 polls instead of simply using the latest one.]

Edited by Hotspur Rovinski, 04 September 2004 - 05:13 PM.

St. Louis must be destroyed!

Me: "I have a job and five credit cards and am looking into signing a two year lease.  THAT MAKES ME OLD."
Josh: "I don't have a job, I have ONE credit card, I'm stuck in a lease and I'm 28! My mom's basement IS ONE BAD DECISION AWAY!"
~~ Josh, winning the argument.

"Congress . . . shall include every idiot, lunatic, insane person, and person non compos mentis[.]" ~1 U.S.C. 1, selectively quoted for accuracy.

#9 darthsikle

darthsikle
  • Dead account
  • 2,139 posts

Posted 05 September 2004 - 10:17 AM

Wow!!  I'm swurprised that even the so called "Kerry" site has bush winning.  Remember, you just need 270 to win
Goodbye.

#10 Rov Judicata

Rov Judicata

    Crassly Irresponsible and Indifferent

  • Islander
  • 15,720 posts

Posted 05 September 2004 - 10:33 AM

darthsikle, on Sep 5 2004, 08:15 AM, said:

Wow!!  I'm swurprised that even the so called "Kerry" site has bush winning.  Remember, you just need 270 to win
The webmaster is pro-Kerry, but he's also pro-Honesty. If you go back into their archives about a week, both sites had Bush losing... and if you go back about a month, he was losing by a huge margin in both.
St. Louis must be destroyed!

Me: "I have a job and five credit cards and am looking into signing a two year lease.  THAT MAKES ME OLD."
Josh: "I don't have a job, I have ONE credit card, I'm stuck in a lease and I'm 28! My mom's basement IS ONE BAD DECISION AWAY!"
~~ Josh, winning the argument.

"Congress . . . shall include every idiot, lunatic, insane person, and person non compos mentis[.]" ~1 U.S.C. 1, selectively quoted for accuracy.

#11 Chipper

Chipper

    Give it up

  • Islander
  • 5,202 posts

Posted 05 September 2004 - 09:58 PM

^ Are those including all states?  For instance, Newsweek's weekly showing has results that show both sides w/ their solid states, and then the number of electoral votes up for grabs in the swing ones.

Kerry has a win in the solid states, but the swing go either way.
"Courtesy is how we got civilized. The blind assertion of rights is what threatens to decivilize us. Everybody's got lots of rights that are set out legally. Responsibilities are not enumerated, for good reason, but they are set into the social fabric. Is it such a sacrifice to not be an a**hole?"

- Jenny Smith on Usenet, via Jid, via Kathy

#12 MuseZack

MuseZack

    132nd S.O.C.

  • Demigod
  • 5,432 posts

Posted 06 September 2004 - 03:20 PM

Hotspur Rovinski, on Sep 4 2004, 10:11 PM, said:

Hotspur Rovinski, on Sep 3 2004, 06:17 PM, said:

Until we get another poll, however, I'm betting Time is simply an outlier.
http://www.pollingre...com/wh04gen.htm

Newsweek got 52-41. It looks like Time was right. I'm absolutely gobsmacked. We'll see whether it sticks.

darthsikle: For something that keeps track of the electoral college, two sites I advocate:

A pro-Kerry site: http://electoral-vote.com/
A pro-Bush site: http://www.electionp...ctions2004.html

Respectively:

Quote

Kerry 252  Bush 270
Kerry 254 Bush 284

[I happen to think that the latter site's methodology is better, as it averages the last 3 polls instead of simply using the latest one.]
Rov:

Both the Time and Newsweek polls have serious methodological problems that were glossed over because of the magazines' publication deadlines (both of them seemed to seriously overweight Republicans in their polling, for example), but it's clear that Bush got some kind of bounce out of the convention.  It's still not clear how much, though.  The new Gallup poll (a poll which has been very favorable to Bush thus far) has Bush up 7 among likelies and 1 among registered voters, which gives him a 4 point bounce among LVs and 2 from RVs.  

This actually corresponds pretty closely to both campaigns internal numbers, which came up with a 4 point Bush lead coming out of the convention.  

It'll be interesting to see where it goes from here, since conventional wisdom is that Americans only start paying attention to presidential campaigns after labor day, and external events (Frances, Clinton's surgery, the Russian hostage massacre, and now seven dead marines in an Iraq car bombing) have largely pushed both campaigns out of the news cycle since the convention.
"Some day, after we have mastered the wind, the waves, the tides, and gravity,
We shall harness for God the energies of Love.
Then, for the second time in the history of the world,
we will have discovered fire."
--Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

#13 Ogami

Ogami
  • Islander
  • 2,976 posts

Posted 08 September 2004 - 01:01 PM

DarthSikle wrote:

All polls are just indicators of the popular vote, which as we know, as no bearing on an election

Would these be those same polls that were lauded as showing Kerry winning a few weeks ago?

You're right though. The election will be decided based on a very simple premise.

How many Americans can the Democrat party convince that Bush lied to get us into an unjustified, illegal, unilateral war in Iraq?

That is the 2004 election, as it has been framed by the opposition party.

I still can't believe it, but there it is. And they think this will win.

Time will tell. I consider the result carved in stone, now that the dancing around the issue has stopped.

-Ogami

#14 MuseZack

MuseZack

    132nd S.O.C.

  • Demigod
  • 5,432 posts

Posted 08 September 2004 - 01:18 PM

Say it with me, Ogami.  It's De-mo-cra-TIC Party.  It's impossible to have a rational discussion with someone who can't even call one of the country's two main political parties by its proper name.  Unless you want to start calling the GOP the "Republic Party" as well.
"Some day, after we have mastered the wind, the waves, the tides, and gravity,
We shall harness for God the energies of Love.
Then, for the second time in the history of the world,
we will have discovered fire."
--Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

#15 nutmeg

nutmeg

    Just passing through

  • Islander
  • 169 posts

Posted 08 September 2004 - 01:40 PM

I generally go here to check out the most recent polls that I trust, i.e. Zogby, etc.  This site, whether you like their extrapolation of the data or not, seems to be sound. They've been pretty non-partisan -- have posted Bush or Kerry leads, given the available evidence at the time.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

nutmeg

edited to add: be sure to scroll down under the map and check out the reasoning behind the red states/blue states predictions.  He also talks about why the recent polls giving Mr. Bush such a bounce were flawed. Lots of information there.

Edited by nutmeg, 08 September 2004 - 01:44 PM.


#16 Shalamar

Shalamar

    Last Star to the Left and Straight on till Morning

  • Forever Missed
  • 17,644 posts

Posted 08 September 2004 - 01:46 PM

Every one makes spelling mistakes, lets not blow that out of porportion.

I think a rational discussion is quite possible even with spelling mistakes, heaven knows I make enough.

Please remember not to make things personal. Belittleing someone's posts does not make for a CIVIL discussion
The three most important R's
Respect for One's Self / Respect for Others / Responsibility for One's Words & Actions.

Posted Image

#17 MuseZack

MuseZack

    132nd S.O.C.

  • Demigod
  • 5,432 posts

Posted 08 September 2004 - 01:53 PM

Shalamar, on Sep 8 2004, 06:46 PM, said:

Every one makes spelling mistakes, lets not blow that out of porportion.

I think a rational discussion is quite possible even with spelling mistakes, heaven knows I make enough.

Please remember not to make things personal. Belittleing someone's posts does not make for a CIVIL discussion
Shalamar, the use of "Democrat Party" isn't a mistake.  It's a longstanding linguistic device used by extreme rightists for quite some time now who think that by using it they're somehow delegitimizing the Democratic Party.  

If someone could point me to the exact etymology of the term and the history of how it came to be used by Limbaugh, Gingrich, Lott and the like, I'd be appreciative.
"Some day, after we have mastered the wind, the waves, the tides, and gravity,
We shall harness for God the energies of Love.
Then, for the second time in the history of the world,
we will have discovered fire."
--Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

#18 Shalamar

Shalamar

    Last Star to the Left and Straight on till Morning

  • Forever Missed
  • 17,644 posts

Posted 08 September 2004 - 02:10 PM

ah okay I had not known that. Thanks for the info :D
The three most important R's
Respect for One's Self / Respect for Others / Responsibility for One's Words & Actions.

Posted Image

#19 HubcapDave

HubcapDave

    Bald is Beautiful!

  • Islander
  • 1,333 posts

Posted 08 September 2004 - 02:15 PM

MuseZack, on Sep 8 2004, 11:53 AM, said:

Shalamar, on Sep 8 2004, 06:46 PM, said:

Every one makes spelling mistakes, lets not blow that out of porportion.

I think a rational discussion is quite possible even with spelling mistakes, heaven knows I make enough.

Please remember not to make things personal. Belittleing someone's posts does not make for a CIVIL discussion
Shalamar, the use of "Democrat Party" isn't a mistake.  It's a longstanding linguistic device used by extreme rightists for quite some time now who think that by using it they're somehow delegitimizing the Democratic Party.  

If someone could point me to the exact etymology of the term and the history of how it came to be used by Limbaugh, Gingrich, Lott and the like, I'd be appreciative.
  :eek4:   :blink:

Huh?

I'm having a really hard time wrapping my head around that proclamation.

How does saying "Democrat Party" delegitimize the Democratic party? That has to be some fascinating thinking that went behind that conclusion!

Having listened to my fair share of right-wing radio, I can't say that I can recall the use of the term "Democrat Party". I have heard the term "The Democrats" used, but that is an appropriate use of the English language.

I'm afraid you're going to have to back this particular assertion up quite solidly, otherwise, I may just have to laugh.

#20 Kosh

Kosh

    Criag Ferguson For President!

  • Islander
  • 11,149 posts

Posted 08 September 2004 - 02:27 PM

HubcapDave, on Sep 8 2004, 02:15 PM, said:

MuseZack, on Sep 8 2004, 11:53 AM, said:

Shalamar, on Sep 8 2004, 06:46 PM, said:

Every one makes spelling mistakes, lets not blow that out of porportion.

I think a rational discussion is quite possible even with spelling mistakes, heaven knows I make enough.

Please remember not to make things personal. Belittleing someone's posts does not make for a CIVIL discussion
Shalamar, the use of "Democrat Party" isn't a mistake.  It's a longstanding linguistic device used by extreme rightists for quite some time now who think that by using it they're somehow delegitimizing the Democratic Party.  

If someone could point me to the exact etymology of the term and the history of how it came to be used by Limbaugh, Gingrich, Lott and the like, I'd be appreciative.
:eek4:   :blink:

Huh?

I'm having a really hard time wrapping my head around that proclamation.

How does saying "Democrat Party" delegitimize the Democratic party? That has to be some fascinating thinking that went behind that conclusion!

Having listened to my fair share of right-wing radio, I can't say that I can recall the use of the term "Democrat Party". I have heard the term "The Democrats" used, but that is an appropriate use of the English language.

I'm afraid you're going to have to back this particular assertion up quite solidly, otherwise, I may just have to laugh.
First I've heard of it.
Can't Touch This!!



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Election 2004, GW Bush, Post Convention Bounce

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users