NationStates Jolt Archive

I hope this doesn't inflame things too much... But I have been thinking and I think, purely by the numbers, Bush may be doomed. Lets look at some things.

Ok, The County is split 50/50 right now. If we assume everyone who voted for Gore in the last election votes for Kerry, we can automatically count up all those electoral states...Now, to date I have met little to no one, ever who voted for Gore, who has said the WONT Vote for Kerry... So lets assume he gets all those stats.

Now, to Bush. If we look at the majority of Republicans, many have become upset and angry about the current administration. I live in Arizona and almost every day I met Conservatives who say they voted for Bush last time, but plan on either voting for Kerry, or not voting at all. If we look at the extremely close numbers that Bush won several states last time, it would take only a few thousand in each of these to either not vote for Bush, or vote for Kerry to tip these states into Kerrys hands.

Also, if we then factor in that Nader has not got on virtually any battle ground states, we can assume Kerry will receive even more votes.

So, given these thoughts, is Bush numerically doomed?

bump

Doomed Like A Fox!

Numbers are meaningless unless they are election poll numbers. THis is true for anyone...

No he isnt, Kerry is. Most polls showed Bush barely beating Kerry before the Democrat convention, after the convention they were about even and havent changed much since (depending on the polls you use, CNN is always biased toward liberals) and now the convention is on for the Republicans and will probably bump him up above Kerry. Plus, Bush decimated Gore during the debates they had and Im betting that he can at the least hold his own with Kerry. Besides, noone votes FOR Kerry, they just vote against Bush.

I think the last election proved that the only polls that matter are the final vote tallies in the Electoral College or the Supreme Court. These Gallup and other type polls have very little bearing on that Tuesday in November. A lot can happen between now and then.

That's funny, most of the unbiased sources (if you can call the media unbiased) are admitting that things aren't looking so hot for Kerry right now. He's lost his support among veterans and Bush has all the Mo right now.

Go GOP!

I think the last election proved that the only polls that matter are the final vote tallies in the Electoral College or the Supreme Court. These Gallup and other type polls have very little bearing on that Tuesday in November. A lot can happen between now and then.

True, we still have the debates ahead. I think that is when the majority of undecided voters will make up their minds who to vote for....and then they will actually have to be motivated enough to get out and vote.

there is no way bush is "doomed" one day into the convention and bushs popularity rises when kerry had shown no rise during his convention. besides bush has chosen stronger speakers and the fact that bush has never lost a debate. bush is on a roll right now. unfortunately we as american have to listen to these swiftboat bomb throwers. thats not helping kerry either. the fact is he was there. good enough for me. at this moment i am leaning towards bush simply cause he stands behind whatever it is he does.wrong/right. i cant find one issue in kerry's senate record that he didnt change. i cant take that from a commander in cheif.

another note: i also feel that no matter what the outcome of this election. if mccain and guilianni(i cant spell) join forces i dont think democrats could compete against them.

people are achually predicting a Bush win

meh, 4 for years...

bump

Okay, I played NationStates for a long time before I got into the threads - but what exactly is the significance of 'bump'? I see it here and there...

Sorry for going off-topic.

Y'know, we've had several elections up here in Canada wherein 'strategic' voting played a role, with varying results. Of course, there's more than two parties, which helps play into it, but I wonder whether it could work well for you guys...

Well, probably not, but at this point, what the Hell, it couldn't hurt to try-!

First off: a 'Bump' is a shameless attempt to move a topic up from the end of the page so it stays on the main page of a forum.

Second off: A note to the Bush Supporters out there…
Do you honestly think that anyone who voted for Gore in the last Election is either going to vote for Bush, or not vote at all? You always go on about how rapid we Liberals are… So seriously, we can assume at a MINIMUM that Kerry will get as many votes as Gore did in 2000.

And Nader? He’s a non-issue. People may add him too polls, but he has failed to get his name on the ballot in ANY of the battle ground states. If you add JUST his votes to the count, Kerry would pick up both Ohio and Florida automatically.

And how about Bush? Where are his votes going to come from? Who is going to vote for him, other then those that already voted for him? The only place to get more votes for Bush is from those that didn’t vote in the last election, and good luck inspiring any of them.

And the Polls? Don’t make me laugh. The only reason your even sighting the ‘Polls’ is because Bush has a slight lead. Big emphasis on ‘Slight’ Seriously if Bush was ahead by 15 points, shoot, even 9points, I’d be worried. But 3 points? 2? This is a lead? Its always within the margin of error! Give me a break.

The only way Bush can actually win out right is through direct electoral fraud.

Numbers are meaningless unless they are election poll numbers. THis is true for anyone...
The bush administration proved that the popular electorial votes don't matter either.. so that was true up UNTIL four years ago. In my run in's with politcal choice (GP) is they don't care for Kerry.. but they don't want bush there either. Although voting promotions have gone up a good chunk just promoting to vote for someone. There hasn't been a huge responce. Although more people are registering to vote and they are trying to come up with methods to make voting work this year many people are not sure weather they are going to actually go out and vote and won't until they are in the booth to which they are going to vote for whoever they feel like at that moment. I just don't get why we don't nominate people that the public will actually want to vote for. Has politics become so grey and the people so indecicive? Personally I hate bush.. I don"t agree with anything he has done in the four years he has been in presidency. So I am tempted to vote for Kerry to ensure I don't have to see the apocolypse.. I kinda wanted to see that when I'm 60. Yet I'm at a crossroads because I stand firm in the belief we need to have a mandatory Three party election where three people are in the political debates to offset this stupidity. I think it's only logical to have something offset the republican/democratic party. While giving the people a door C; another option. We can have 50 diffrent brands of katsup to choose from but not so in elections. This Election is not about who will be a better rep. for our country but who will do the least damage. That is not how it is suppose to go. Every president has thier fair share of screw ups. Wether it be white water scams or making bills that end up royally screwing the people. I can accept that but these four years has been almost comical except this is not a strip this is our lives. Please don't tell me that Clinton despite all his Blunders was the closest we'll ever get the having a John Kennedy in my lifetime because that is exactly how it's looking.
Ahh I love the freedom of speech.. to bad the FCC is ready to take it all away.

I'm just hoping Bush doesn't win because he's been screwing America over for the past four years, imagine what he can do for another term!

I support Kerry, but things aren't looking so good for him right now, so he better get his act together if he wants to win. I can't understand why anyone would vote for Bush though, he's a moron.

Do you honestly think that anyone who voted for Gore in the last Election is either going to vote for Bush, or not vote at all? You always go on about how rapid we Liberals are… So seriously, we can assume at a MINIMUM that Kerry will get as many votes as Gore did in 2000.

Not at all....Gore got alot of votes off of Bill Clinton's popularity. Polls have actually been showing there are going to be alot more Democrat cross overs than Republicans.

Guys, Bush has this election almost in the bag. Here's why....First, at the numbers he is running at this point in the election, other presidents seeking reelection with these numbers at this poitn have won. Second is the electorial college deficit Kerry is fighting. Demographics this year have made the gap bigger than even Al Gore had to over come. Third reason is this Vietnam issue. I think the right has played Kerry pretty bad on the Vietnam thing, and he's fueled the fire with his obvious mistatements (Chrismas in Cambodia, Dr. King dying). The idea of pushing his Vietnam record was to prove he could be a war time president, but instead it's made him look less trustworthy to alot of people, and sidelined his views on any current issues, making it difficult to distiguish himself from Bush. I think this convention is going to be the nail in the coffin for him. In the DNC, democrats talked the moderate game to appeal to swing voters, but the figures of Ted Kennedy and Carter loomed over the whole event. For the RNC, you are seeing alot of McCain and Guiliani, who moderates and swing voters are really going to identify with, and they've both come out hard for Bush. I believe Kerry is going to have his core Anybody But Bush voters, but I think the right has steered the campaign better than the left and Kerry just hasn't got the support to pull out the win.

there is no way bush is "doomed" one day into the convention and bushs popularity rises when kerry had shown no rise during his convention. besides bush has chosen stronger speakers and the fact that bush has never lost a debate. bush is on a roll right now. unfortunately we as american have to listen to these swiftboat bomb throwers. thats not helping kerry either. the fact is he was there. good enough for me. at this moment i am leaning towards bush simply cause he stands behind whatever it is he does.wrong/right. i cant find one issue in kerry's senate record that he didnt change. i cant take that from a commander in cheif.

another note: i also feel that no matter what the outcome of this election. if mccain and guilianni(i cant spell) join forces i dont think democrats could compete against them.

I agree. I think the polls for Bush is now about 10% higher than Kerry (I think 53% Bush 43% Kerry, something like that but don't quote me on it).

Republicans, if they choose McCain and Giuliani will have possibly high chances next election in 2008, however there is a possiblity that Hillary may run in 2008. (just a rumor, but seems possible to me with Bush out of office by then, assuming he wins this time around.) A lot of people will vote for her in hopes of having a first female president, and possibly not so much on the issues, which is just speculation and rumor.

I agree. I think the polls for Bush is now about 10% higher than Kerry (I think 53% Bush 43% Kerry, something like that but don't quote me on it).

Latest gallup (before RNC) has it something like Bush 50%, Kerry 47%. Which is within margin of error, though Bush has held this small lead for a month or so.

Bush is not doomed.....I think Kerry is going to lose in the end. There is just nothing of substance to the guy. Can he answer ANY question with a straight answer?

the democratic party is slowly losing support I was at Davenport IA. when both president Bush and Kerry were there campaigning I was surprised to see that only after Bush delivered a great speach and laid out his foundations for his next term in office that kerry quickly said the same thing only oddly enough it didn't sound prepared at all as if it had been written only ten minutes prior to his speach. And I hate to bring it up but I'm going to any man or woman who supports abortion and the killing of ten of thousands of children every year does not deserve to be in any public office not to mention the Presidency which is the office that reflects the integrity of the United States of America. Oh the democrats will complain that the war on terror is useless because hundreds of americans are dying and doing their duty which they swore to uphold when they think nothing of the babies killed in abortion. My question is this, when a moral man like Bush is set against a man like kerry who do you think would do the job best? Bush a man who daily prays for our nation or a man who doesn't even follow through with even the simplest of agreements. We need only to ask ourselves if my child had to die would you have it killed by abortion or fulfilling their duty as a soldier. On 9/11 thousands of americans died, do you think that we should've not reacted to this horrific plight.

Bush is not doomed.....I think Kerry is going to lose in the end. There is just nothing of substance to the guy. Can he answer ANY question with a straight answer?

In the end? Kerry is already losing. The Swiftboats certainly aren't helping him. His best argument against Bush is that he is doing everything wrong, and that Kerry would do many of the same things, just better, whatever that means. No one even knows for sure where Kerry stands on The Iraq War. The way he contradicts himself, he probably doesn't even know himself. If he continues this way, which for the most part it is to late to change much, he's going to continue to drop in the polls. Kerry certainly doesn't have much of a chance anymore.

Second off: A note to the Bush Supporters out there…
Do you honestly think that anyone who voted for Gore in the last Election is either going to vote for Bush, or not vote at all? You always go on about how rapid we Liberals are… So seriously, we can assume at a MINIMUM that Kerry will get as many votes as Gore did in 2000.


Actually, I wouldnt go by that assumption. A lot has changed in the last 4 years and Kerry is hardly as strong a candidate as Gore was. At least Gore stood for something, even if it was no more than a lockbox. But people voted FOR Gore, not against Bush. Ill bet that there are a lot that voted for gore that wont vote for Kerry. They might not vote for Bush, but they could not vote at all. Besides, who would want a senator who spent 20+ years in the Senate without passing a single bill of his own to be President? Anyone who votes for Kerry is either insane or is sadly misguided and believes they are voting for the lesser of 2 evils.

In the end? Kerry is already losing. The Swiftboats certainly aren't helping him. His best argument against Bush is that he is doing everything wrong, and that Kerry would do many of the same things, just better, whatever that means. No one even knows for sure where Kerry stands on The Iraq War. The way he contradicts himself, he probably doesn't even know himself. If he continues this way, which for the most part it is to late to change much, he's going to continue to drop in the polls. Kerry certainly doesn't have much of a chance anymore.
The truly important point is, Kerry actually lost support during the Dim convention, and has lost even more since then. As a data point, Bush41 entered his convention in 1988 in a double-digit deficit against another Taxachusetts Liberal, and when was the last time we talked about the presidency of Mike Dukakis?

Also, Bush43 has a second convention coming...on 9/11/04. Enough said about that.

I am not ready to predict the margin of victory (anyone who does is simply fooling his or herself,) but I can tell you that on January 20th 2005, President Bush will take his second Oath of Office.

Besides, noone votes FOR Kerry, they just vote against Bush.

What's your point? Nothing unites like a common enemy.

I agree. I think the polls for Bush is now about 10% higher than Kerry (I think 53% Bush 43% Kerry, something like that but don't quote me on it).

Republicans, if they choose McCain and Giuliani will have possibly high chances next election in 2008, however there is a possiblity that Hillary may run in 2008. (just a rumor, but seems possible to me with Bush out of office by then, assuming he wins this time around.) A lot of people will vote for her in hopes of having a first female president, and possibly not so much on the issues, which is just speculation and rumor.

51% Democratic, 47% Republican, actually.

The only way Bush can actually win out right is through direct electoral fraud.


Already preparing excuses for a lost election I see

I hope this doesn't inflame things too much... But I have been thinking and I think, purely by the numbers, Bush may be doomed. Lets look at some things.

Ok, The County is split 50/50 right now. If we assume everyone who voted for Gore in the last election votes for Kerry, we can automatically count up all those electoral states...Now, to date I have met little to no one, ever who voted for Gore, who has said the WONT Vote for Kerry... So lets assume he gets all those stats.

Now, to Bush. If we look at the majority of Republicans, many have become upset and angry about the current administration. I live in Arizona and almost every day I met Conservatives who say they voted for Bush last time, but plan on either voting for Kerry, or not voting at all. If we look at the extremely close numbers that Bush won several states last time, it would take only a few thousand in each of these to either not vote for Bush, or vote for Kerry to tip these states into Kerrys hands.

Also, if we then factor in that Nader has not got on virtually any battle ground states, we can assume Kerry will receive even more votes.

So, given these thoughts, is Bush numerically doomed?

Which county is this you speak of? And what state is it in?

Already preparing excuses for a lost election I see
They're getting desperate.

51% Democratic, 47% Republican, actually.

Guess it does matter greatly what group of people were polled. This morning I am sure Bush had a definite lead over Kerry, but different polls and different times will generate different results.

Mmkay ....

Nobody is getting desperate and nobody is building excuses for a lost election.

The election isn't until November 2nd and even then there is no winner until everything is properly counted, canvassed, and finalized by the Senate. That won't be complete until early January.

Learn how elections work in the US, people. Yeesh.

The only reason we can officially declare some form of winner is if one of the candidates concedes the election - as is usually the case. However, if a candidate does concede, they may withdraw the concession at any time until the canvassing is completed.

All of the polls are meaningless. First of all, internet polls can be easily fixed by anyone who knows how to remove cookies and/or mask their IP. Secondly, if you look at the numbers, the pollsters tend to accept 300-1000 people as a good cross-section of the entire population of the US.

You also have to consider the polling source. Who do they poll? I mean, "Of 1000 Republicans polled, 99.99% will vote Bush!" isn't exactly a fair poll, now is it?

Where was the poll done? Rich corporate America or in the projects?

And my final question: Have any of you ever been polled?

I don't worry too much about polls. I will know who won the election - whether fairly or by theft - on January 20th, 2005 for absolute certain.

Oh Yeah! If you want to know what John Kerry stands for, just go to his damn website:

http://www.johnkerry.com/index.html

His views are there for public scrutiny. Feel free to read all you want. Now stop trying to say he doesn't have any clear stands on issues because it just makes you look like a retard.

Guess it does matter greatly what group of people were polled. This morning I am sure Bush had a definite lead over Kerry, but different polls and different times will generate different results.
As Dementate said, Bush does and has had a small lead when polls are taken of likely voters, at least according to Gallup - by about 3%.

Mmkay ....

Nobody is getting desperate and nobody is building excuses for a lost election.

The election isn't until November 2nd and even then there is no winner until everything is properly counted, canvassed, and finalized by the Senate. That won't be complete until early January.

Learn how elections work in the US, people. Yeesh.

The only reason we can officially declare some form of winner is if one of the candidates concedes the election - as is usually the case. However, if a candidate does concede, they may withdraw the concession at any time until the canvassing is completed.

All of the polls are meaningless. First of all, internet polls can be easily fixed by anyone who knows how to remove cookies and/or mask their IP. Secondly, if you look at the numbers, the pollsters tend to accept 300-1000 people as a good cross-section of the entire population of the US.

You also have to consider the polling source. Who do they poll? I mean, "Of 1000 Republicans polled, 99.99% will vote Bush!" isn't exactly a fair poll, now is it?

Where was the poll done? Rich corporate America or in the projects?

And my final question: Have any of you ever been polled?

I don't worry too much about polls. I will know who won the election - whether fairly or by theft - on January 20th, 2005 for absolute certain.

Oh Yeah! If you want to know what John Kerry stands for, just go to his damn website:

http://www.johnkerry.com/index.html

His views are there for public scrutiny. Feel free to read all you want. Now stop trying to say he doesn't have any clear stands on issues because it just makes you look like a retard.

A few good points, but just waiting until January 2005 to see the outcome of the elction isn't very interesting. Arguing such trivial matters as these polls with complete strangers is much more fun. Sure, we don't know who will win, but it is common to speculate such things on such forums.