NationStates Jolt Archive

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=usatoday/bushsjobapprovalratingclimbsbackabove50


The share of Americans who say they approve of the job Bush is doing inched over the 50% mark to 51%. No president who was at or above 50% at this point in an election year has lost.


TAKE THAT LIBERALS!!!!

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=usatoday/bushsjobapprovalratingclimbsbackabove50





TAKE THAT LIBERALS!!!!
it doesnt matter anyway, the majority of america is as dumb ass you so it was bound to happen and then the electoral system favors stupidity

it doesnt matter anyway, the majority of america is as dumb ass you so it was bound to happen and then the electoral system favors stupidity

Yep!
Proof of that is Clinton's 2 elections.

OMG TEH CONSERVATIVE RUUUULE!!11!!!!111

NUUU LIBER4L5 R TEH GR34T35T!1111111

Heh, here comes the flame war :D

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=usatoday/bushsjobapprovalratingclimbsbackabove50





TAKE THAT LIBERALS!!!!
In. One. Poll.

it doesnt matter anyway, the majority of america is as dumb ass you so it was bound to happen and then the electoral system favors stupidity

Should Kerry win then I am sure this summation will hold?

American democracy is a sham anyway. The only people who ever get elected to the presidency are the rich.

Should Kerry win then I am sure this summation will hold?
my point is proven, thank you

it doesnt matter anyway, the majority of america is as dumb ass you so it was bound to happen and then the electoral system favors stupidity



Grow up, People who disagree with you are not stupid! MORON!

my point is proven, thank you


you don't even know what summation means.

Grow up, People who disagree with you are not stupid! MORON!your first post was IN YOUR FACE LIBERALS

i think you already proved the point quite nicely

American democracy is a sham anyway. The only people who ever get elected to the presidency are the rich.



Blowhard!

your first post was IN YOUR FACE LIBERALS

i think you already proved the point quite nicely


You already proved you are stupid!

You already proved you are stupid!
lets try this again

your first post was "IN YOUR FACE LIBERALS", i dont think you're allowed to talk any more

Don't make me have to get all moderatey.

lets try this again

your first post was "IN YOUR FACE LIBERALS", i dont think you're allowed to talk any more



Are you retarded? Liberals hate GW, He is getting stronger! TAKE THAT YOU ASSHOLE LIBERAL FREAKS!!!!!!!

You already proved you are stupid!

-You are stupid!
-No, you are stupid!
-No you are!!

...

grow up a lill, both of you

Don't make me have to get all moderatey.


Go ahead! I want to be deleted, Just do it baby!

Anyway, the longer the trend hold, the closer it gets to it's end...

Are you retarded? Liberals hate GW, He is getting stronger! TAKE THAT YOU ASSHOLE LIBERAL FREAKS!!!!!!!
point

Are you retarded? Liberals hate GW, He is getting stronger! TAKE THAT YOU ASSHOLE LIBERAL FREAKS!!!!!!!

Sigh.
I really don't want to make it 3 forumbans in one night...
Cut the flaming/baiting. NOW.


http://www.satanstephen.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/DrChaotica.jpg (http://www.satanstephen.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/taunt1.mp3)
Myrth
Ruler of the Cosmos
Forum Moderator

-You are stupid!
-No, you are stupid!
-No you are!!

...

grow up a lill, both of you


ButtDork!

ButtDork!
buttdork, thats funny

look I think that recently the proverbial liberal propaganda gunboat has let loose some of it's best ammo in years . Most of it was directed at one man alone. george w. bush. yet the most respected, oldest, and historicly accurate poll in the nation ( gallup) still has dubya being supported by 51% of the population. Now you can blame stupidity but i blame intelligence. People are turned off by propaganda and hatred. after all the problems in iraq, abu graib, the terror alerts, farenheit 911, president bush still has a very good shot at winning the election. that would make me furious if i were a liberal......thank god im not.

Don't make me have to get all moderatey.

Do not piss off the ruler of the cosmos.

doesnt anyone have any real comments?

Have fun being deleted...

Have fun being deleted...


I plan on it. :)

The criteria by which elections are predicted are split this time around; conventional wisdom is being made anew.

If you look at the re-elect numbers (which are much more relevant than 'approval' numbers): http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm, you can see a steady slide in Kerry's numbers. (What was that people were saying a few days ago about advertising not affecting votes? the barrage of negative advertising seems to be having an effect...)

The truth is, though, that the US doesn't have an election in November. It has fifty-one separate elections, all winner take all.

The current electoral vote count strongly favors Kerry:

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

Bush is still playing to his base; it's not clear to me how he's expecting to influence undecided voters (who generally do not break for the incumbent).

This guy is going too far...

It's actually very very sad...

Idiot.

[EDIT] Please, Lord, make it a permanent deletion!

Nice outdated numbers! Bush leads in Ohio!

look I think that recently the proverbial liberal propaganda gunboat has let loose some of it's best ammo in years . Most of it was directed at one man alone. george w. bush. yet the most respected, oldest, and historicly accurate poll in the nation ( gallup) still has dubya being supported by 51% of the population. Now you can blame stupidity but i blame intelligence. People are turned off by propaganda and hatred. after all the problems in iraq, abu graib, the terror alerts, farenheit 911, president bush still has a very good shot at winning the election. that would make me furious if i were a liberal......thank god im not.

I think you're pretty much dead on, except for the last part. Liberals are already furious. That's one of the qualifiers to even be a liberal in the first place. You have to hate "the man".

And you have to act like a spoiled teenager who hates their parents. :D

3 forumbans in one night! Yay!

http://www.satanstephen.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/ban.jpg

Permanent forum ban. He ain't coming back.


http://www.satanstephen.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/DrChaotica.jpg (http://www.satanstephen.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/taunt1.mp3)
Myrth
Ruler of the Cosmos
Forum Moderator

so what? you know full well I assume that kerry has the weakest post convention lead since mondale in 1984? he lost badly and he was in better shape than kerry is at this point. your argument about reelect numbers is a good point, it would seem.

look I think that recently the proverbial liberal propaganda gunboat has let loose some of it's best ammo in years . Most of it was directed at one man alone. george w. bush. yet the most respected, oldest, and historicly accurate poll in the nation ( gallup) still has dubya being supported by 51% of the population. Now you can blame stupidity but i blame intelligence. People are turned off by propaganda and hatred. after all the problems in iraq, abu graib, the terror alerts, farenheit 911, president bush still has a very good shot at winning the election. that would make me furious if i were a liberal......thank god im not.
Exactly. Americans do not want propaganda, they want classy election campaign tactics. Kerry's crew should just stop with all the silly propaganda and mount a real campaign, one that relies on using a kid's tv theme show to name call the other candidate.
And obviously being commander in chief at a time when American soldiers are torturing people makes you unbeatable. Really who are these looser Kerry supporters, and where are their Christian values? What a bunch of tossers, they dont even support torture, illegal detention, or any of that really cool stuff we can expect under Bush...

3 forumbans in one night! Yay!

http://www.satanstephen.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/ban.jpg

Permanent forum ban. He ain't coming back.


http://www.satanstephen.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/DrChaotica.jpg (http://www.satanstephen.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/taunt1.mp3)
Myrth
Ruler of the Cosmos
Forum Moderator

You're just have fun aren't you?

so what? you know full well I assume that kerry has the weakest post convention lead since mondale in 1984? he lost badly and he was in better shape than kerry is at this point. your argument about reelect numbers is a moot point, it would seem.

Ah, yes, the liberal media. The polls showing how weak Kerry's convention bounce was were taken during his speech. After the speech, a full five percent of likely bush voters became independent voters.

This year, there was no need for Kerry to rally democrats during the convention. They're pre-rallied.

If you look at the gallup numbers in detail - 45% approval for Bush's handling on Iraq - and up from 40% for a while. The Najaf situation may alter those numbers up or down fairly soon.

40% approval for handling terrorism? That seems like a bad sign to me.

Bush is on his way to being the second one-term Bush president - assuming the votes get counted fairly.

Exactly. Americans do not want propaganda, they want classy election campaign tactics. Kerry's crew should just stop with all the silly propaganda and mount a real campaign, one that relies on using a kid's tv theme show to name call the other candidate.
And obviously being commander in chief at a time when American soldiers are torturing people makes you unbeatable. Really who are these looser Kerry supporters, and where are their Christian values? What a bunch of tossers, they dont even support torture, illegal detention, or any of that really cool stuff we can expect under Bush...


most of the propaganda being hurled at president bush isnt from john kerry as mr. kerry isnt even involved in it that often. also, mr. bush's administration court martialed the soldiers involved in the "torture". mr. kerry however calls himself a "war criminal" ( but i guess using your logic that's lyndon johnson's fault) . there has been no illegal detention under president bush ( the constitution, its pretty cool to ACTUALY READ ONCE IN A WHILE)

Ah, yes, the liberal media. The polls showing how weak Kerry's convention bounce was were taken during his speech. After the speech, a full five percent of likely bush voters became independent voters.

This year, there was no need for Kerry to rally democrats during the convention. They're pre-rallied.

If you look at the gallup numbers in detail - 45% approval for Bush's handling on Iraq - and up from 40% for a while. The Najaf situation may alter those numbers up or down fairly soon.

40% approval for handling terrorism? That seems like a bad sign to me.

Bush is on his way to being the second one-term Bush president - assuming the votes get counted fairly.



WEAKEST CONVENTION BOUNCE SINCE MCGOVERN, WEAKEST LEAD AT THIS POINT FOR A DEMOCRAT SINCE MONDALE. i NEVER MENTIONED ANY LIBERAL MEDIA. ALL I SAY IS NOBODY HAS THE ELECTION IN THE BAG.

I don't hate liberals, I don't hate conservatives, I just hate ignorance.

I am a liberal.

I gladly accept criticism about Kerry, but just saying 'He's stup1d, hahaha, teh pwnage on t3h liberalzorz.' is not criticism, it's ignorance.

And another thing, some person here said that people do not like propoganda and that's why they'll vote for Bush, but I seem to remember many ads that openly bash Kerry and ones that also bear the 'I'm George Bush and I approved this message' slogan. If that's not propoganda, I don't know what it.

I am very patriotic, but most americans just make me sick.

im leaving now but let me say this. For all of the rationales and rhetoric, this election is damn close. nobody can convince a fair minded person otherwise without lying. the news of the surge in bush approval rating today was , however, a good sign for me personaly. good bye.

I am very patriotic, but most americans just make me sick.

most americans make you sick? thats 142 million people bare minimum you passed a judgement on. I hope you know what your talking about before you say such a nasty and mean thing.

most of the propaganda being hurled at president bush isnt from john kerry as mr. kerry isnt even involved in it that often. also, mr. bush's administration court martialed the soldiers involved in the "torture".

Okay, Rumsfeld OK'd Gitmo-style tactics in Iraq.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/07/04/wtort04.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/07/04/ixnewstop.html

If you read the Taguba report, you can see that this went on for months, and that military intelligence was involved.
http://www.agonist.org/annex/taguba.htm

The Red Cross notified the US government of the abuses in October - months before Taguba - and nothing happened. http://www.commondreams.orgy /headlines04/0510-03.htm

Putting a couple of low-ranking national guard on trial is just blowing smoke, and not addressing any of the systemic problems.

How do you define torture, by the way? What would it take for you to drop the quotes? I would think raping a teenage boy would be enough, but apparently that's not correct.

there has been no illegal detention under president bush ( the constituation, its pretty cool to ACTUALY READ ONCE IN A WHILE)

constitution. Furrfu!

You do realize the US government is getting ready to release Yaser Hamdi without charging him, right? After holding him without access to a lawyer for three years? The consitution grants everyone - not just US citizens - a right to a jury trial within sixty days.

Okay, let's break this down slowly. The US held a few hundred taxi drivers, kidnapped aid workers, unlucky fighters - and the occasional terrorist - in Guantanamo for years. Without a hearing, the US declared them 'enemy combatants', to be held indefinitely.

The Supreme Court said, no, you have to follow Geneva and hold a hearing on their status. How does that not illustrate that the years previous were illegal detentions?

Also, the US held 'ghost prisoners' without giving them access to the Red Cross. Ditto?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1209681,00.html

most of the propaganda being hurled at president bush isnt from john kerry as mr. kerry isnt even involved in it that often.
Are suggesting that we let a little thing like 'facts' get in the way of a Democrate bashing?

there has been no illegal detention under president bush ( the constitution, its pretty cool to ACTUALY READ ONCE IN A WHILE)
You might want to email the constitution to the Supreme Court (who'd have thought they dont have a copy of their own?)

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=usatoday/bushsjobapprovalratingclimbsbackabove50





TAKE THAT LIBERALS!!!!

Not exactly a good title for your post if you're trying to avoid a flame war...

You know, to say the truth, this election is horrible. I am devoted to the Liberals, but it seems that John Kerry wasn't the right choice. I mean, he won't criticize ALL of Bush's wrong doings at all. Bush will keep on criticizing him. If Kerry leads the poll the night before the election, we will probably see FNC go for Bush while all the other networks go for Kerry, and then we'll find out that a whole bunch of African-American votes weren't counted in one county and so on....the same thing in 2004 if Kerry leads the polls.....

Personally, I think George Bush and John Kerry are both retarded boondock butt-sniffers. George Bush declared that we were going to participate in a "crusade against the allies of terror." I dont care who it is, a crusade never solves everything. I think we should have learned our lesson centuries ago when those dumb fanatics almost wiped out the jewish population for being so-called "infidels" in their crusades. :eek:

For those of you who didnt know, John Kerry voted in favor of the invasion of Iraq. And I dont care what anyone says, it was an invasion no matter what side you're seeing it from. Then he had the gonads to go on tv and publicly criticize Bush for such a horrendous thing. Nice job you goddamn hypocrite. :headbang:

The problem here isn't with the concept of our democratic republic. The problem is with the politicians we allow to run it. My solution, shoot all the politicians. :mp5: Either that, or simultaneously rip their political power from each and every one of them, because as far as I'm concerned, there isnt a single one of them who isnt a liar, a thief, or a corrupt piece of dirt. If they were clean, they wouldnt be a politician.


And to whoever that "Myrth" character is, a thousand blessings to you. You are my new idol.

*sigh*

my point is proven, thank you

How so?

You posted this:

it doesnt matter anyway, the majority of america is as dumb ass you so it was bound to happen and then the electoral system favors stupidity

I asked if you would draw the same conclusion (that the electoral system favours stupidity) if Kerry won. So rather than avoid the question and try and make pseudo-insults how about answering the question? I guess the fact that the answer you will give, if honest, makes you a hypocrit or a liar.

How so?

You posted this:



I asked if you would draw the same conclusion (that the electoral system favours stupidity) if Kerry won. So rather than avoid the question and try and make pseudo-insults how about answering the question? I guess the fact that the answer you will give, if honest, makes you a hypocrit or a liar.
the eklectoral college favors stupidity in that it is a winner take all system per state, the majority of one party in a state gets all that staes votes to that candidate, it disregards all other votes, a person can win the popular vote by a large margine and lose the electoral vote

i was so ready to go in there and defend my point of view, but i really don't feel like being shouted down by people who can barely spell. honestly, the discussion on pubic-hair shaving was more mature than this. so have fun with this thinly-veiled flame-war, i'm going to go read something worth my time.

the eklectoral college favors stupidity in that it is a winner take all system per state, the majority of one party in a state gets all that staes votes to that candidate, it disregards all other votes, a person can win the popular vote by a large margine and lose the electoral vote

Thats nice, but you still have not answered my question.

i was so ready to go in there and defend my point of view, but i really don't feel like being shouted down by people who can barely spell. honestly, the discussion on pubic-hair shaving was more mature than this. so have fun with this thinly-veiled flame-war, i'm going to go read something worth my time.

Yes, it is a shame people have to resort to insults rather than argue the issues but what can you do?

Ignore them!

Bush has a five point lead in Ohio last time I've heard and Kerry's electoral numbers might be slipping some! Its going to be a great Presidential Race!

definalty a great race

definalty a great race

I'm hoping that Bush wins in '04! I fear for the US if he doesn't! If Kerry is elected President, I hope he does well and proves me wrong but my gut is telling me that Bush will win in '04.

I'm hoping that Bush wins in '04! I fear for the US if he doesn't! If Kerry is elected President, I hope he does well and proves me wrong but my gut is telling me that Bush will win in '04.
Oh, what the hell is Kerry going to do to destroy the United States. Calm down formal.

It's awful early to be crowing about a single poll that has an approval rating barely above 50%, but if you're ready to get overconfident with more than 80 days before the November election, be my guest. I'll start getting excited/worried about poll numbers in October. Late October.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=usatoday/bushsjobapprovalratingclimbsbackabove50





TAKE THAT LIBERALS!!!!
This is a poll....
and polls mean ZILCH unless it's the official election.

If Kerry wins 'twill be a pleasant belated birthday present. (My birthday is october 25th) Though I'd rather see Darth Nader in office than anyone else.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=usatoday/bushsjobapprovalratingclimbsbackabove50





TAKE THAT LIBERALS!!!!
Wow, someone has never heard of a margin of error. This is what annoys me about the more vocal conservatives, you can't argue with them, because they really don't have much ammo. Seriously, I saw a book in the store today, "Micheal Moore is a fat stupid white man" I opened it up, took a look inside, and frankly, that was basically all the book had..

so what? you know full well I assume that kerry has the weakest post convention lead since mondale in 1984? he lost badly and he was in better shape than kerry is at this point. your argument about reelect numbers is a good point, it would seem.
Actually in regards to that, it depends on which paper you read. I saw one, said he actualy got hurt by the convention (GO D-LIST CELEBS!!!) the other said he got helped (YAY LURCH!)

Wow, someone has never heard of a margin of error. This is what annoys me about conservatives, you can't argue with them, because they really don't have much ammo. Seriously, I saw a book in the store today, "Micheal Moore is a fat stupid white man" I opened it up, took a look inside, and frankly, that was basically all the book had..
Your right, all we do is make big generalizations, I'll try to address that at the next VRWC meeting.

im leaving now but let me say this. For all of the rationales and rhetoric, this election is damn close. nobody can convince a fair minded person otherwise without lying. the news of the surge in bush approval rating today was , however, a good sign for me personaly. good bye.
The thing that is odd about this election is that the bush years have polarized politics. Usually most people declare themselves independents up until the actual election, this year however, thats not the case. Most people went into the campaign with a Pro/Anti-bush position. Also, remember, there was a point in history when polls turned out to be wrong.

One poll, quoted from USA Today, a conservative Newspaper, and with no reference to:
When or where the poll was taken
How many ppl were asked
The margin of error included
What state(s) it was conducted in
What questions were asked

Just put up as fact.
I see the media is now telling the American public that Bush has already won ('No president who was at or above 50% at this point in an election year has lost'). Well, then I guess there's no point voting for anyone else is there? - cause look the papers have said No president has ever lost from this point. So all you Kerry voters out, don't bother! And all you undecideds, well best vote for Bush cause you don't want to be on the losing side now do you? ;)

Ignore them!

Bush has a five point lead in Ohio last time I've heard and Kerry's electoral numbers might be slipping some! Its going to be a great Presidential Race!
Great advice, FD--ignore anyone who doesn't share your viewpoint. :rolleyes:

Again--it's 80 days from the general election, and it's way too early to be poll-watching. Remember--the media needs this race to be close, even if it winds up being a blowout. Races sell papers and drive ratings--blowouts don't.

I'm making a prediction right here--neither candidate will have more than a 5% lead in a national horserace poll (a meaningless number anyway because of the Electoral College) after the Republican Convention, regardless of what happens in the news. The media companies who are running the polls will find a way to skew the questions in order to get a tight race regardless of what the real situation is. But my gut tells me that in November, it'll be a blowout, one way or the other. Obviously I'm hoping for Kerry, and I think he'll win, but we won't have a replay of 2000--there will be a clear winner one way or the other this year.

Great advice, FD--ignore anyone who doesn't share your viewpoint. :rolleyes:

Again--it's 80 days from the general election, and it's way too early to be poll-watching. Remember--the media needs this race to be close, even if it winds up being a blowout. Races sell papers and drive ratings--blowouts don't.

I'm making a prediction right here--neither candidate will have more than a 5% lead in a national horserace poll (a meaningless number anyway because of the Electoral College) after the Republican Convention, regardless of what happens in the news. The media companies who are running the polls will find a way to skew the questions in order to get a tight race regardless of what the real situation is. But my gut tells me that in November, it'll be a blowout, one way or the other. Obviously I'm hoping for Kerry, and I think he'll win, but we won't have a replay of 2000--there will be a clear winner one way or the other this year.

Though I agree with you Incertonia, what I don't agree with is that Kerry will win. I think Bush will win in 2004! :p

I stoped reading that article when I skimmed "Bush's approval hit an all time low of 46 in May." It was reported at 44 not that very long ago.

Ignore them!

Bush has a five point lead in Ohio last time I've heard and Kerry's electoral numbers might be slipping some! Its going to be a great Presidential Race!


Ohio polls:
Bush Kerry Nader MoE
ARG August 11 45.0% 48.0% 2.0% 4.0%
ARG August 11 45.0% 48.0% --- 4.0%

Pardon?

That's right...Bush has 48%, Kerry 2%, Nader 4% and there is no Margin of Error.

Ohio polls:
Bush Kerry Nader MoE
ARG August 11 45.0% 48.0% 2.0% 4.0%
ARG August 11 45.0% 48.0% --- 4.0%

Pardon?
Last poll she saw, more likely. And Ohio will be in play until November, no question.

Joke...

Last poll she saw, more likely. And Ohio will be in play until November, no question.
A GOP poll most likely. A 8 pt swing? You'd have to be kidding me.

I want to quote the latest Red vs. Blue video...

<http://www.redvsblue.com/>

"I voted for Nader! I hate you all!"

Yeah... yeah... this "debate" sounds about like that vid.

And thus the debate begins...can someone remind me why anyone bothers on these boards?

A GOP poll most likely. A 8 pt swing? You'd have to be kidding me.
Yeah--polling ain't an exact science, and if there were enough time between polls and enough stuff happened in the meantime (Democratic Convention, more job losses, economic stagnation) then 8 points is certainly doable, even over a month's time. The only way to really keep an eye on movement is to look at trend lines over an extended period on polls done by the same company using the same methodology, and then examined side by side with polls done by other companies in the same area over the same period. That helps reduce the likelihood of outliers.

Yeah--polling ain't an exact science, and if there were enough time between polls and enough stuff happened in the meantime (Democratic Convention, more job losses, economic stagnation) then 8 points is certainly doable, even over a month's time. The only way to really keep an eye on movement is to look at trend lines over an extended period on polls done by the same company using the same methodology, and then examined side by side with polls done by other companies in the same area over the same period. That helps reduce the likelihood of outliers.
Yeah, I know, but that was under 10 days and the MoE's didn't overlap at all.

Yeah, the biggest problem with poll-watching is outliers. Remember Formal Dances' last thread on the Kerry bounce where she posted the same poll three times as proof Kerry had lost ground after the convention? That was an outlier. Gallup's usually pretty good, but when 6 other polls disagree with you, you got a bad sample, simple as that. It can happen to anyone. That's why it's best to look at a wide range of polls to get a general idea of where things stand.

And if you look at the range of Ohio polling--a place that's getting hammered because it's a battleground state--you see neither candidate outside the MOE, and generally inside a couple of points of each other. Even that ARG poll that has Kerry with a 3 point lead has a 4 point MOE. That's why I say it'll be close come November. I don't see either candidate pulling away in a national horserace, although I do see an electoral landslide.

Here's another prediction: if Bush isn't up by at least 3 points in the horserace by late October, he'll lose by at least 50 electoral votes. If he's tied or down in late October, he'll lose by 100. He's got to have a lead outside the MOE in order to win in November, because undecideds overwhelmingly break for the challenger.

And if you look at the range of Ohio polling

What about Florida now? I heared that Kerry is leading a bit now. But I know that it will change after his PM stunt that I expact he will do after the storm there.

A lots of citizens find their leaders very good when they pas by after a disaster, same thing here.

And thus the debate begins...can someone remind me why anyone bothers on these boards?
Because we like to watch the moronic and everso narrow-minded conservatives dig their own graves.

What about Florida now? I heared that Kerry is leading a bit now. But I know that it will change after his PM stunt that I expact he will do after the storm there.

A lots of citizens find their leaders very good when they pas by after a disaster, same thing here.
Same format as last time kiddies:


Pollster Polling Date Bush Kerry Nader MoE
Quinnipiac August 10 41.0% 47.0% 4.0% 3.0%
Quinnipiac August 10 42.0% 49.0% --- 3.0%
ARG August 5 43.0% 50.0% 5.0% 4.0%
ARG August 5 44.7% 52.5% --- 4.0%

What about Florida now? I heared that Kerry is leading a bit now. But I know that it will change after his PM stunt that I expact he will do after the storm there.

A lots of citizens find their leaders very good when they pas by after a disaster, same thing here.Florida is another state that's close and will remain so down to the wire. Bush has the advantage of having his brother as governor and having a powerful political machine in place. He'll also be able to spread some federal emergency funds around, which will help him out. It's too bad in a sense that the hurricane hit where it did--in places where his support is already reasonably strong. If he was able to be a hero in traditionally demcratic parts of the state, he might be able to sway more people to his side.

But regardless, Florida will be tight. It has too many electoral votes and is too closely divided for either candidate to concede. There will be a lot of focus and a lot of intensity down there into November and beyond.

Same format as last time kiddies:


Pollster Polling Date Bush Kerry Nader MoE
Quinnipiac August 10 41.0% 47.0% 4.0% 3.0%
Quinnipiac August 10 42.0% 49.0% --- 3.0%
ARG August 5 43.0% 50.0% 5.0% 4.0%
ARG August 5 44.7% 52.5% --- 4.0%


Euh, I meant the PM stunt of Bush of course, just saw that now

It's too bad in a sense that the hurricane hit where it did--in places where his support is already reasonably strong. If he was able to be a hero in traditionally demcratic parts of the state, he might be able to sway more people to his side.
That is just sick. In every sense it's a pity the hurricane 'hit' any inhabited place. Implying otherwise (even indirectly) because of some perceived political gain is disgusting and cold.

That is just sick. In every sense it's a pity the hurricane 'hit' any inhabited place. Implying otherwise (even indirectly) because of some perceived political gain is disgusting and cold.Oh Jesus Christ--I've lived through more hurricanes than you can shake a stick at. Yeah, it's a shame that the hurricane hit where it did and that the people who lost homes and more importantly, their lives, are suffering. But I was talking about a political reality, which is that Bush has the power as President to really help those areas financially which he no doubt will do, but that the areas most desperately affected are already largely in his corner, so from a political perspective, his ability to help will shore up existing support but won't garner him much new support. That's all I was saying.

OMG TEH CONSERVATIVE RUUUULE!!11!!!!111

NUUU LIBER4L5 R TEH GR34T35T!1111111

Heh, here comes the flame war :D
Man, shutup yo! :p

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=usatoday/bushsjobapprovalratingclimbsbackabove50

Quote:
The share of Americans who say they approve of the job Bush is doing inched over the 50% mark to 51%. No president who was at or above 50% at this point in an election year has lost.




TAKE THAT LIBERALS!!!!
Well there is always a first time. One record has to go because earlier when Bush was at like 44%, it was stated that no incumbent had ever won when trailing at that point in time. I am not sure what month it was....steph would know. At any rate, one of the comments will prove false and I hope it is this one!

Great advice, FD--ignore anyone who doesn't share your viewpoint. :rolleyes:


Formal Dances was referring to people resorting to insults rather than debating the issues if you had bothered reading previous posts.

This post is directed at the entire thread.





http://www-theor.ch.cam.ac.uk/people/ardlouis/junk/demons.of.stupidity.gif

Well there is always a first time. One record has to go because earlier when Bush was at like 44%, it was stated that no incumbent had ever won when trailing at that point in time. I am not sure what month it was....steph would know. At any rate, one of the comments will prove false and I hope it is this one!
Actually, Paul Martin and the Liberals had fallen low in the polls here prior to the election, but they came back and are holding a decent minority government. But then, this is a different political system, but it is possible to get a low poll rating, since there is possibly a bias in the polling, sicne there is only a small number of voters being surveyed.

Because we like to watch the moronic and everso narrow-minded conservatives dig their own graves.

Well, thank God for people who dig their own graves. If Kerry made some comments like this it would be an easier race. Anyhoo.

Ah yes, poor Florida. I live in South Carolina, and we will be doing some cleaning of my backyard/removal of many fallen trees. I also heard Orlando's airport suffered some damage. Also, there were all those houses that got trashed. Hmm. I'm just glad Florida has always been there to take the worst of the damage for SC. Except for Hurricane Hugo. And no, he is not a wrestler. I think Hugo was about 15 years ago. Holy crap, that was ugly.

Maybe it was a phone poll :

http://www.burgerfamily.net/downloads/you_might_be_a_redneck.jpg

Hurricane Andrew also gave that area a good pound back in '92.

Actually, Paul Martin and the Liberals had fallen low in the polls here prior to the election, but they came back and are holding a decent minority government. But then, this is a different political system, but it is possible to get a low poll rating, since there is possibly a bias in the polling, sicne there is only a small number of voters being surveyed.
Yes the Conservative certainly did defy the polls and they slipped from 35% to 29%. I enjoyed that so say the least. :)

Hurricane Andrew also gave that area a good pound back in '92.
Andrew destroyed south Florida on the eastern seaboard--from the Keys to Palm Beach and then moved on to Louisiana. Charley took out the west side of Florida south of Tampa, and in terms of damage, it's better off that it hit there, because that part of Florida is more sparsely populated than the southern tip is. It's crowded--what part of Florida isn't--but it's not as crowded as other parts are.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=usatoday/bushsjobapprovalratingclimbsbackabove50





TAKE THAT LIBERALS!!!!
Oh I am quaking in my boots... Really people, of course most people approve of the way Bush is running the country. The huge propaganda machines see to that, but public support for his administration's efforts do not equal votes. How many millions feverantly hated Clinton's Administration yet voted for him?

True, the Keys were spared mostly. And please, I bet I have been through as many or more Hurricanes as anyone else here. The only limitation is that I was born in '87. Yes, its true, I'm only 17 going on 18 (in March yay!).

Oh I am quaking in my boots... Really people, of course most people approve of the way Bush is running the country. The huge propaganda machines see to that, but public support for his administration's efforts do not equal votes. How many millions feverantly hated Clinton's Administration yet voted for him?

I am a republican, but I admired Clinton for getting some in the Oval Office while on the phone with (enter national leaders name here). I think that is what America is all about. Trying to get some in the most public place possible without getting caught ;)

Oh I am quaking in my boots... Really people, of course most people approve of the way Bush is running the country. The huge propaganda machines see to that, but public support for his administration's efforts do not equal votes. How many millions feverantly hated Clinton's Administration yet voted for him?
True--notice how the article didn't mention any "do you think the country is on the right track or wrong track" numbers. Last poll of those I saw had Bush down around 40-44%. Not good.

True, the Keys were spared mostly. And please, I bet I have been through as many or more Hurricanes as anyone else here. The only limitation is that I was born in '87. Yes, its true, I'm only 17 going on 18 (in March yay!).
I was graduating from high school the year you were born--seriously--and grew up in south Louisiana, so I've had my share. My girlfriend is 8 years younger than I am and grew up in south Florida. We share horror stories about them, and both experienced Andrew firsthand. If there's anything I really miss about living down there, it's the weather. San Francisco is depressingly mild. And it's always foggy.

The problem here isn't with the concept of our democratic republic. The problem is with the politicians we allow to run it.

Actually, I think the problem is with the majority of the population treating the election process like a spectator sport.

Think about it -- people WATCH the results on TV, they study the polls and the statistics, but only about 30-40% of the registered voters actually vote. They get all riled up and cheer, and watch others do the work. Sounds like spectator sports, no?

We're all supposed to take part. It's Democracy, not the World Series.

I was graduating from high school the year you were born--seriously--and grew up in south Louisiana, so I've had my share. My girlfriend is 8 years younger than I am and grew up in south Florida. We share horror stories about them, and both experienced Andrew firsthand. If there's anything I really miss about living down there, it's the weather. San Francisco is depressingly mild. And it's always foggy.
I was in San Fran late Feb. and early March and I must say that it was nice to have temperatures in the mid to upper 60's. It was refreshingly mild....qwityerbitchin LOL. :rolleyes:

There was about 3 feet of snow though at Lake Tahoe, but a beautiful sunny day and the roads were clear.

I was in San Fran late Feb. and early March and I must say that it was nice to have temperatures in the mid to upper 60's. It was refreshingly mild....qwityerbitchin LOL. :rolleyes:

There was about 3 feet of snow though at Lake Tahoe, but a beautiful sunny day and the roads were clear.Can't help it--I like lively weather. Big storms with heavy rains that make you pull off the side of the road. Scorching sun with humidity in the high 80s. Here in SF, it's fog and mist. I live on the sunny side of town, and lately it's been foggy every day. We're coming up on what's supposed to be the summer here pretty soon--I can't wait.

This showed up on fark.com a bit back. It shows how polls are completely moronic. I'll post u the pic and the links if u wanna see em.

http://www.laogaming.com/images/bushkerry.jpg

and the links, respectively (i hope)

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Presidential_Tracking_Poll.htm#kerry
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi%3ff=/news/archive/2004/07/24/politics1251EDT0496.DTL

bah does nobody have a comment or are you all just slow readers/asleep

bah does nobody have a comment or are you all just slow readers/asleep

*blink*

There are seven pages of posts and you say "nobody has a comment"?

And you're calling US slow readers?

bah does nobody have a comment or are you all just slow readers/asleep
Fine--here's your comment. The one from the San Francisco Chronicle is an AP piece from July 24, before the Democratic National Convention. The one from Rasmussen Reports is a tracking poll that updates daily. That just might have something to do with the difference between the two.

This was posted on fark.com when they first came out. they used to be right, i havent checked them now.

and also... u actually all read those pages?

This was posted on fark.com when they first came out. they used to be right, i havent checked them now.

and also... u actually all read those pages?
Well, I read the Fournier AP piece when it came out back in July, so I skimmed it, and I'm familiar with Rasmussen because they do a tracking poll both for individual states and for the national horserace. I tend not to get too excited with any of the results because it's too far out from the election for much to be indicative of where we'll be in November. I learned my lesson with Howard Dean.

That said--it could have been that the headlines were accurate even at the time because different polling services have different ways of determining what's a tossup state and what's a leaning state. It's not like there are hard and fast rules on this kind of stuff. The poll the AP cited probably didn't give Kerry a state that Rasmussen did, or gave Bush a state that Rasmussen didn't.

It's all largely a guessing game right now. For instance, the latest Rasmussen page slides Maine back into the tossup column and away from leans Kerry while moving Missouri from leans Bush back into the tossup column. If, come November, Kerry is seriously worrying about Maine or Bush is seriously worrying about Missouri, whichever one is worrying is dead in the water, because in real terms, neither of those states is a tossup in anything but a blowout.

American democracy is a sham anyway. The only people who ever get elected to the presidency are the rich.

How ridiculous is this?
OF COURSE only the rich will be President.

America is the EASIEST place to make it.
All you have to do is work hard and apply yourself and you will be successful (ie "rich")

How can someone who can't even be successful in his own life (ie the "poor")be expected to run the country?

He can't...and shouldn't ever be President.

yes, what im saying is polls are no good, and can be twisted by any1 who feels like screwin with some peoples minds

How ridiculous is this?
OF COURSE only the rich will be President.

America is the EASIEST place to make it.
All you have to do is work hard and apply yourself and you will be successful (ie "rich")

How can someone who can't even be successful in his own life (ie the "poor")be expected to run the country?

He can't...and shouldn't ever be President.

haha that's great.

They can certainly be twisted--you can make a poll to get whatever result you want. That doesn't mean that they're necessarily no good. You just have to realize that they're only a snapshot of the views of a certain group of people at a particular moment in time, and that they can be manipulated.

bah i dont even care about polls. ill vote for who i vote for. why do i need to see whyo other people are going to vote for? ill find that out in november.

Ehh..Polls mean very little.

Two months ago, Bush's numbers we so low that that no president in history with numbers like that, that far from the election, has ever won re-election.

You already proved you are stupid!

Even though I am conservative, I think you are acting like an arrogant prick and just because someone doesn't agree with you, you could show them how you disagree with them in a civilized matter instead of going "LOLLERSKATES!!! UR STOOOPID!!!"

Oooo! 51 %?
Big Deal!