Bush receives 11 point bounce...( Newsweek )

[Infohawk]

I don't understand why people say negative advertising is bad for the one who dishes it out. This whole convention was an attack on Kerry-- and it worked, as it worked with Dukakis.

Time to point out CHeney deferments, national guard scandal, other scandals and ram it so hard people don't know what to believe.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Is it within the realm of possibility that they just happened to call a majority of Bush supporters? Polls are a joke. The exit polls matter. Those will be the ones that actually include people who haved just recently decided to register to vote for the sole purpose of voting Bush in or out. I would tend to think there will be many more of the latter...

David Brooks (noted conservative pundit) was on the Lehrer Newshour yesterday, and commented that the Time poll, which showed an 11-point bounce, was too large an increase to be credible.

I think there clearly was some bounce, but we'll need to see more polls to see how large. Remember, President Bush had an even larger bounce after President Reagan's death, and it settled back down within a month. We shall see . . .

Ofcourse I'm sure David Brooks might rethink that now that two polls have shown a similar jump....or maybe he won't
Yeah, we need more polls but with the TIME and NewsWeek polls showing similar jumps - I'd say he atleast got a moderate bounce if not a "big" bounce considering this supposed "split" country.

CsG

 

[tmservo]

There is a NY Times article that puts this in perspective:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09...ed=print&position=

Right now, Newsweek has him up by 11. with a 13 point bounce.
Time magazine's seperate poll has him up by 9 with an 11 point bounce.
Gallup's new poll, out for subscribers, has him up by 10, a 12 point bounce.

The newest poll internal in Missouri has him up by 8 points in Missouri, his first significant lead in the state.

Kerry's biggest problem is simple: he is trying to run his own campaign. Part of being a good leader is picking other people to do the jobs you don't do so well. Clinton picked Carville. Bush picked Rove. Right now, as insiders say, Kerry is calling all his shots. He has $75M in funds to spend for the general campaign since his election. He spent $21M of it in August. Did you notice? Probably not because a gigantic chunk of it was wasted like throwing it in the fire trying to squash the swift boat guys. Bush was queried about his service in the national guard and said "Oh, absolutely, John Kerry served more honorably then I did in Vietnam, and we thank him for it" (AP, August 30) and he otherwise hasn't said anything. It kind of put a damper on the story, because no matter what gets said, he's basically said "yep, I agree.. and your point to the election is?" Whereas John Kerry keeps throwing out commercials and ads and spending money to combat someone who's only spent $1.7M. So, he's blown a big chunk of his budget and hasn't gotten anywhere, as some democrats say, he hasn't talked about any issue but Vietnam.

Meanwhile, he goes out right after the convention and holds a midnight rally, which cost him more then a hundred thousand to be seen on only one cable network in full (MSNBC) because most other networks weren't setup for it at all (CNN didn't get notice until the darn day before!) so more money blown for a speech.. in which he could have came out and said "it's time we talk about domestic issues" instead he went back to "let me tell you about vietnam" well, darnit, you aren't helping yourself, you look like you are chasing your own tail.

If Kerry doesn't hire a campaign manager and take a backseat instead of micromanaging his campaign, then he deserves to lose. Because if you can't surround yourself with those people, and you micromanage like this... If come Sept. 20, he hasn't hired in a real campaign manager and shook up his campaign, then he's in trouble; because after that point, any major shakeup will look desperate; if he does it soon, it will be a minor story for the media circle.. if he does it in October, he'll look doomed.

 

[1EZduzit]

Let's see what happens in the debates. The Dem's should jump on him right now (and not let up) for backing out of the third debate.

 

[arsbanned]

I think Bush will maintain this lead and Kerry will not recover. I fear for this country.

 

[Steeplerot]

This is a strong country with a 300 year Democratic history things will work out ars -have faith

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: tmservo

If Kerry doesn't hire a campaign manager and take a backseat instead of micromanaging his campaign, then he deserves to lose.

Well you seem to be in the know, let him know I'd be glad to do it. Have a great record clearly shown in here. :thumbsup:

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Shuxclams
1. Up? Down? All around?


2. 2.8 up in GDP compared to the months previous which also from earlier in the administration we're down vs Personal Income and Corporate Profits leads to less money in your pocket, less money in my pocket and fewer jobs for everyone but those in High level exuctive positions in major Corporations.

3. "we're growing because interest rates are low; energy prices are coming down -- which is kind of like tax relief." The first part is true... his "Tax Relief" didnt help anyone becuase there wasnt any "Tax Relief" for people like us, secondly the price of Oil was still at extremely high levels AT THAT TIME. P.S. - G. W. Bush is a retard and you know it.

1. I clicked on the first one and saw a chart that doesn't provide any useful information, unless you can tell me what a "% change of nonfarm payrolls" is. I clicked on the second one and saw that their numbers are completely wrong. Using their numbers and some simple multiplication, we're 2,898,000 below when Bush started, which is blatantly untrue. The third one is a joke - put up by a site with an obvious anti-Bush agena (don't believe me, go to http://www.epinet.org/) with misleading charts that don't state specific data. Instead of stating how jobs change, they state how they compare to projections, or such bogus stats as "Change in total employment, 41 months after the recession began." Give me a break. Job numbers are increasing, regardless of what Kerry tells you.

2. I can't understand what you're trying to say - try restating it more clearly.

3. I can prove in a matter of two seconds that you pay less taxes now on the same income than you did when Bush took office. Stating otherwise is simply false.

Conjur, you quoted a site that I have already mentioned in this post as biased. Stating that jobs are down since he started is correct. However, inferring that the fault for that belongs to Bush, plus further inferring that the economy is failing because of these numbers, is not, or is at the very least up for debate.

 

[tmservo]

*laugh* I just know people in both campaigns.. the beauty of doing college debate for years, you run into all the right people. But right now the mood inside of his campaign is strange. The problem that they are having is that when they want to get time in areas, they can't (Hurricane Frances is screwing up the Florida buy) when they want to make a point, it gets botched because the message doesn't get out to the networks in time to setup a full feed (midnight rally); they spend tons of money with no impact..

Kerry ran into a big problem when Bush challenged him by saying "knowing what we know now, would you go to Iraq anyway" and he said "yes". (
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/...n/186677_thomas18.html ) after that it became much harder for him to make his case amongst anti-war democrats.. if you're for it anyway, what real difference do you have?

The other problem Kerry's got is a strange situation one.. Hurrican Frances and Charley have occupied the news. And they provide Bush a chance to go to Florida afterwards and get basically free publicity by walking through the destruction, sending in the national guard, and organizing a cleanup. It's like complete free press. He's got $75M in the bank to spend now that his convention is over, Kerry is down to $54 after spending $21 fighting the swift boat vets, which was a -stupid- campaign tactic, he should have just said "well, everyone can remember whatever they want however they want, but I won't stoop to them" rather then continuing to throw out press releases and spend money on ads which meant that the media could keep replaying the swiftie ad for free. Stupid, stupid, stupid campaign move.

And I know a lot of people like Edwards, but he has a low chance of even bringing Kerry his home state, where latest polling shows Kerry trailing by 12. So, he doesn't get you North Carolina, and he only has one term in the senate. He's pretty, but he has a tendency to make really dumb statements (on meet the press, asking "Rabin who?" referring to Israel's former PM).. he's not Dan Quayle, but he has a lot less elected experience then Quayle, and he has his moments of "bad comment" as well.. and Quayle at least brought Bush Sr. his home state (Indiana) no chance of that for Edwards.

Kerry has run a campaign largely based on "I'm not Bush" but if he can't run a campaign on "here's what makes me unique" and change his strategy from throwing nukes at gadflies.. we'll see.

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: bjc112
MSNBC


Anxious to see more.

For the NEWSWEEK poll, Princeton Survey Research Associates interviewed 1,008 adults aged 18 and older.

:roll:

Is it within the realm of possibility that they just happened to call a majority of Bush supporters? Polls are a joke. The exit polls matter. Those will be the ones that actually include people who haved just recently decided to register to vote for the sole purpose of voting Bush in or out. I would tend to think there will be many more of the latter...

What about the Time poll?

Is it within the realm of possibility that they just happened to call a majority of Kerry supports in earlier polls?

Come on man,

 

[MidasKnight]

Kerry's biggest problem is simple:

Kerry

 

[dmcowen674]

Bush's biggest problem is simple:

Bush[/quote]

Fixed for you

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: arsbanned
I think Bush will maintain this lead and Kerry will not recover. I fear for this country.

I share your doubts that Kerry will recover. I always thought Kerry was not the best candidate to face Bush. Also, I think the Democratic party has been a bit inept at dealing with the coniving, dirty, and tricky nature of the Republicans. At this point I think Kerry has to get negative and I don't think he'll be able to pull it off without hurting himself. That said, it's still bound to be a close race and I wouldn't put money on Bush winning.

But maybe it's not a bad idea to have the neoconservative beliefs that have building since Reagan have an unfettered turn at running hte country for a protracted period of time. Their economic ideas have been shown to be failures time and time again in the past-- and now they're more extreme than ever! The fundamentalist social values are only bound to alienate more Americans as time goes on. If Bush wins there would be a deteriorating confidence in America and a growing "malaise" for the next four years. That on top of these past four crappy years would teach Americans that the neocon theology is bogus and we'll have a return to common sense afterwards. Of course-- I may have to sneak out of the country for a while and return when things improve if he gets re-elected.

 

[Darkhawk28]

I have a friend that's an engineer for Intel and when he and his colleagues go abroad, he has to say they're from Canada. Not for safety reasons, but because they're embarrassed. They'll lose international contracts if they say they're from the U.S. Pretty sad really.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
I have a friend that's an engineer for Intel and when he and his colleagues go abroad, he has to say they're from Canada. Not for safety reasons, but because they're embarrassed. They'll lose international contracts if they say they're from the U.S. Pretty sad really.

Not surprising at all.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: arsbanned
I think Bush will maintain this lead and Kerry will not recover. I fear for this country.

I'm afraid you may be right, but we still have nearly two months until the election - there's a lot of time for things to turn around. As I said before, President Bush got quite a bounce after Reagan's death, and it evaporated fairly quicky.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
I have a friend that's an engineer for Intel and when he and his colleagues go abroad, he has to say they're from Canada. Not for safety reasons, but because they're embarrassed. They'll lose international contracts if they say they're from the U.S. Pretty sad really.

So... May I ask what competition Intel is worried about, or how they actually convince people that Intel is Canadian?

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: arsbanned
I think Bush will maintain this lead and Kerry will not recover. I fear for this country.

I'm afraid you may be right, but we still have nearly two months until the election - there's a lot of time for things to turn around. As I said before, President Bush got quite a bounce after Reagan's death, and it evaporated fairly quicky.

But comparing President Reagan's death, to the barrage of attacks, and quite a large success with the recent convention aren't really the best things to compare..

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
I have a friend that's an engineer for Intel and when he and his colleagues go abroad, he has to say they're from Canada. Not for safety reasons, but because they're embarrassed. They'll lose international contracts if they say they're from the U.S. Pretty sad really.

So... May I ask what competition Intel is worried about, or how they actually convince people that Intel is Canadian?

No, not that Intel is from Canada, but the actual PEOPLE that go abroad are Canadian.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: bjc112

But comparing President Reagan's death, to the barrage of attacks, and quite a large success with the recent convention are really the best things to compare..

I'm afraid I don't understand your post.

FWIW, there's no question President Bush had a strong August, and at this point he appears to be the front runner. Sen Kerry really needs, IMO, to rethink his approach, and if possible bring in someone with some fire in the belly to help with his campaign (a la James Carville). I just don't believe he's added 11 points in such a short interval - it defies common sense IMO.

 

[Nightfall]

The debates are going to have an impact on these numbers as well. Personally, I think the candidates are going to be heading into the election on a dead heat come late October. Not unless one of them melts down in the debates.

 

[heartsurgeon]

don't forget your friend Bill Clinton..his malady and it's treatment will allow him to "suck the oxygen" out of the room that Kerry is in. Heck, Clinton was doing a freakin telephone interview with Larry King Live from his hospital room!! You know Bubba is going to be giving out interviews after surgery from his hospital room!! Betwen the hurricane in FGlorida, and Clinton's surgery...Kerry won't be able to get a word in edgewise this week..Kerry is off the radar because of Bush, the Hurricane, and Clinton's surgery.

Gotta love the Clinton's...

they have two gigantic fund raising machines (527's!) already in place for Hillary (H in 2008)..

Center for American Progress
whose members read like a role call of the Clinton White House staff, and has been funded to the tune of 10-20 million by Soros. John Podesta is President (Clinton's Chief of Staff)

and

Make America Work For Us, a.k.a., The Media Fund, which is bankroled by Hollywood, and run by Harold Ickes (Clinton's Deputy Chief of Staff, and head of Clinton's Presidential campaign)

Both these groups are amassing hugh sums of money (which they appear not to be spending on the behalf of Kerry..) presumably to fund Hillary's campaign in 2008.

2008 is going to be the WWF heavyweight championship bout.....

Hillary versus ??

Kerry is not part of the Clinton plan...

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: bjc112

But comparing President Reagan's death, to the barrage of attacks, and quite a large success with the recent convention are really the best things to compare..

I'm afraid I don't understand your post.

FWIW, there's no question President Bush had a strong August, and at this point he appears to be the front runner. Sen Kerry really needs, IMO, to rethink his approach, and if possible bring in someone with some fire in the belly to help with his campaign (a la James Carville). I just don't believe he's added 11 points in such a short interval - it defies common sense IMO.

Your were saying how the jump from Reagans death disappeared quickly, After what i would say was a generally weak DNC, and the beatings leading up to the RNC, and then a strong RNC really hurt Kerry..

Bush got more of an emotial boost from President Reagans death..

I think the lead with shrink, but not as fast as some would think..

 

[raildogg]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
I have a friend that's an engineer for Intel and when he and his colleagues go abroad, he has to say they're from Canada. Not for safety reasons, but because they're embarrassed. They'll lose international contracts if they say they're from the U.S. Pretty sad really.

Not surprising at all.

Ashamed to be American? how weak

 

[Steeplerot]

My friends tell me the same thing when they go overseas...
Letting people know you are from the US is a bad thing now...
the world and half this coutnry are sick of W and the sheep still buy into it.....
Maybe Iraq would be a better choice for bushies they could have holy war all day and night...
Oh wait- chickenhawks nevermind...