| Author | Message | ||
     sbenois Citizen Username: Sbenois Post Number: 12037 Registered: 10-2001  |
Of course it's about Bush. But wasn't it about Kerry right after the DNC? Wasn't it fresh for him? No bounce. It was a thudddddddddddddddd. Now that Bush has a bounce you try to discredit the poll, the pollsters ("Milton Friedman") and everything except the one thing that matters: Kerry is getting his ••• kicked right now and he'd better think of something quickly. | ||
| anon Citizen Username: Anon Post Number: 1354 Registered: 6-2002 |
Sbenois: Let's try to help you make up your mind for whom to vote: Ron Reagan, Jr., says vote based on who supports expansion of stem cell research. Maybe that's as good a reason as any. How about "pro-choice" vs. "pro-life". The Pres gets to appoint Supreme Court Justices. The lack of health insurance for millions and the ridiculous cost of it for us small business folks is a real problem. What has GWB done about it? What does he propose? Medical Savings Accounts? Those folks don't make enough money to save or they would buy insurance. Let small businesses unite to buy insurance? Good idea, but how is it going to work, and how do we stop the insurance companies from escalating their rates? Maybe with a change to a Democrat, whose contituency is the less well off, there is a chance for something meaningful. BUT let's talk about 9-11 and homeland security. I heard some specifics from GWB on Domestic spending but not one new proposal for improving security at airports, shipping ports, etc. And what ever happened to the 9-11 Commission Report? Does anyone remember that? Kerry says he will implement all the recommendations. NJ Republican Kean said the candidates should be judged on whether they will implement those recommendations. What I heard GWB say is that the way to keep America safe is by defeating the lunatics in Iraq. Really? Kerry supports the War in Iraq, which pisses off lots of his would be supporters, but claims he would handle it differently. Well, who wouldn't, except Bush? But what does it have to do with Homeland Security? Oh, did I mention amending the Constitution to outlaw Gay Marraige? That idea is so lame that even Bush doesn't really believe it. But he has to pander to his base. And while I'm on that... I didn't hear Zell Miller or Dick Cheney's speeches but I keep hearing them linked together. That's funny. From what I read of Miller's speech, he said his family is more important than his political party. The VP feels quite the contrary obviously. Everyone else's daughter gets a starring role. Both the Dems and the GOP end their conventions with the whole mishpucha on the platform. But where is poor young Ms. Cheney. I think she was there way in the back for about 30 seconds. And from what I understand she is probably smarter and more politically astute than the rest of them put together. What does the "Good Book" say about he who troubles his own house "inheriting the wind"? If Kerry or Edwards really had cojones they would say something about Mr. Cheney's dissing of his own daughter! | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 1193 Registered: 3-2004 |
There's no doubt that your last statement is absolutely true. It's just that it's not over yet. Your high numbers following the convention can also be chalked up to the power of the incumbency. Obviously, Kerry doesn't have name recognition the way Bush does. It all comes down to Kerry's determination right now. By the way survey bias is inherent in most surveys, so what I said about the M. Friedman bias of Time and Newsweek is not in jest. If you knew those magazines as well as I do, having worked for Time, and if you had done informal and regular content analysis of their political reporting, as I have, you would notice the bias. | ||
| singlemalt Citizen Username: Singlemalt Post Number: 314 Registered: 12-2001 |
Anon, I've been begging the Kerry campaign to talk about domestic issues since the DNC. His campaign is run by idiots and the polls are now showing it. I know it is still early and a 10 pt lead will be difficult for Bush to maintain, but if the Kerry campaign doesn't get into talking about issues where they have an advantage, Bush will run away with this by 15 pts when it's all said and done. | ||
| sbenois Citizen Username: Sbenois Post Number: 12038 Registered: 10-2001 |
As opposed to what? Sean Hannity? I guess Newsweek is too right wing for you??? | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 1195 Registered: 3-2004 |
S: no, on a measurable continuum from left to right. A regular editor for Time (Dowd) has become a major campaign manager for Bush, for example. The connections are very close. | ||
| sbenois Citizen Username: Sbenois Post Number: 12040 Registered: 10-2001 |
OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH okay. That explains it. The numbers (of course) don't matter. | ||
| anon Citizen Username: Anon Post Number: 1355 Registered: 6-2002 |
I absolutely do not believe the latest poll numbers. They don't make sense. For Kerry to lose 7 or 8 points in a couple of days means that millions of people who were pissed at Bush and looking for any opportunity to get rid of him have changed their minds based on a few speeches. If there were a large number of undecideds in the previous polls I could see a bounce, but for the last few months all the polls have showed that number as very small. I could be wrong but let's watch the next few days. | ||
| singlemalt Citizen Username: Singlemalt Post Number: 315 Registered: 12-2001 |
Tulip, I've also worked in the media. While the three major news magazines (Time, Newsweek, US News) all attempt to be fair, they generally have a bias that is well known throughout media circles and to anyone (with any intelligence, so sorry you may be except) who actually reads them. In my opinion, the magazines rate as follows: Time - liberal leaning Newsweek - moderate US News - conservative leaning As much as their stories may be biased they actually hire outside polling groups. The writers and editors do not conduct or calculate the polls and they are independent of editorial bias. Please don't comment on some undergraduate course you took in the 80's to make your point. I’ve taken more classes in political science, journalism and business to know that almost anything learned in the classroom is the complete opposite of what really happens in the real world. | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 1197 Registered: 3-2004 |
The numbers, sbenois, can be easily, even unintentionally cooked or skewed in survey research. YOU HAVE to wait and see. I agree with anon. Hold onto your hat and see what happens over the next week or so. | ||
| singlemalt Citizen Username: Singlemalt Post Number: 316 Registered: 12-2001 |
>>If there were a large number of undecideds in the previous polls I could see a bounce, but for the last few months all the polls have showed that number as very small. I could be wrong but let's watch the next few days.<< He is taking moderate and conservative democrats. The same people who voted for Reagan. | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 1198 Registered: 3-2004 |
Singlemalt, I taught the course for three years at Seton Hall, actually early 1990's. Thankey. | ||
| singlemalt Citizen Username: Singlemalt Post Number: 317 Registered: 12-2001 |
Those poor students. Did they demand their money back? | ||
| anon Citizen Username: Anon Post Number: 1356 Registered: 6-2002 |
Singlemalt: Why is he taking "moderate and conservative" democrats? Could Kerry possibly move further to the Right? If so, wouldn't Nader take all the "liberal" democrats? | ||
| singlemalt Citizen Username: Singlemalt Post Number: 318 Registered: 12-2001 |
Professor Tulip, Can you explain why the same Time and Newsweek polls (with the same wording of the questions, same sample, etc.) have had such drastic changes in the period of one week? Did one of the time editors follow around the pollsters slipping $20 into the pocket of anyone who answerd "BUSH". | ||
| anon Citizen Username: Anon Post Number: 1357 Registered: 6-2002 |
Kerry won the nomination because he was perceived as more moderate than Dean. Is Kerry now perceived as being too far left? What has he said that is far left? | ||
| singlemalt Citizen Username: Singlemalt Post Number: 319 Registered: 12-2001 |
Great question Anon. I think it all has to do with delivery of information and staying on message. Bush has moved as far to the left as Kerry has to the right in an attempt to get the moderate voters from the other party. The Bush campaign was much more effective at painting Kerry a liberal and Bush a moderate than the Dems were at doing the opposite. As for Nader - I think he is more likely to get Bush voters this time around for the "anyone but Bush" Republicans out there. | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 1199 Registered: 3-2004 |
single, child, read the above and the archived of this and other threads today. Please don't make me repeat myself. I hated that when I was teaching. PS. If a poll calls itself the Time magazine poll, Newsweek, CNN, etc, don't you think they are looking for pollsters with similar bias? | ||
| singlemalt Citizen Username: Singlemalt Post Number: 320 Registered: 12-2001 |
It's not what he has said, it's how he has voted. I think Kerry won the nomination since most Democrats thought he could beat Bush. In reality, Lieberman would have been the best selection since he truly has a moderate voting record that would appeal to Republicans voters. | ||
| sbenois Citizen Username: Sbenois Post Number: 12041 Registered: 10-2001 |
Dearest Former Professor Tulip, You have not been authoirized to use the word Thankey here. If you would like to use thankey, you must ask my permission first as I am the offical MOL father of thankey. Thankey. |
