[Zimphire]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/...ain/index.html

Despite a week of negative headlines about how his administration handled the threat of terrorism before the attacks of September 11, 2001, President Bush's political position against presumptive Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry has strengthened, according to a new CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll.

I have a closet full of pillows.

[SimeyTheLimey]

There is only one poll that matters.

[pooka]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
There is only one poll that matters.

Thas what I'm talkin' bout.
<highfive>

[Zimphire]

And Bush will win that one as well.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/...ain/index.html

Despite a week of negative headlines about how his administration handled the threat of terrorism before the attacks of September 11, 2001, President Bush's political position against presumptive Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry has strengthened, according to a new CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll.

I have a closet full of pillows.

and the more negative Kerry gets, the worse he'll lose.

[finboy]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
and the more negative Kerry gets, the worse he'll lose.

Not if CNN, the New York Times and the Washington Post hold up THEIR end of the bargain. Most of the voting sheep won't consider it "negative" when the media is also engaged in it, they'll consider it to be "the truth."

[zachs]

There's still 8 months to go. At some points, Bush will lead; at others, Kerry will.

The one I'll be looking at is the one in November.
You know, Bush's one-way ticket back to Crawford, Texas.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by zachs:
There's still 8 months to go. At some points, Bush will lead; at others, Kerry will.

The one I'll be looking at is the one in November.
You know, Bush's one-way ticket back to Crawford, Texas.

Or Kerry's back to his mansion in Georgetown.

[zachs]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Or Kerry's back to his mansion in Georgetown.

Well, I mean, sure. I guess he could live in his own house while serving as President if he wants to.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
[url]I have a closet full of pillows.

Yes I'm sure you do. Those pillows must have bitemarks all over them as well

Time to come out of the closet eh Zimphire?

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by zachs:
Well, I mean, sure. I guess he could live in his own house while serving as President if he wants to.

But then we'd have to attack him for taking "long vacations."

[zachs]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
But then we'd have to attack him for taking "long vacations.")

Not if he is living there instead of at the White House.

Nonetheless...it's gonna be fun Election Night, when the Bushies are trying to figure out just why they lost.

[nredman]

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by zachs:
There's still 8 months to go. At some points, Bush will lead; at others, Kerry will.

The one I'll be looking at is the one in November.
You know, Bush's one-way ticket back to Crawford, Texas.

More proof Kerry fans are deluded.

[zachs]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
More proof Kerry fans are deluded.

No more than the Bushies are.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by zachs:
No more than the Bushies are.

Uh no, Bush is ahead in the polls.

Even after Clark's book spin shill. Bush is still gaining.

How about that. The Dems FUD machine isn't working too well.

[zachs]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Uh no, Bush is ahead in the polls.

Even after Clark's book spin shill. Bush is still gaining.

How about that. The Dems FUD machine isn't working too well.

You do realize that polls aren't static, don't you? They change throughout the course of the election.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by zachs:
You do realize that polls aren't static, don't you? They change throughout the course of the election.

Yep, they've been getting better and better lately.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Yep, they've been getting better and better lately.

Exactly. But let him keep all the hope he has.
I am going to be watching this forum come election night .
I bet you'll either see zach on here ranting how it was somehow unfair that Bush won.
I wonder if the Dems will try to play the crybaby game again.
Naw, I don't think they Kerry wants to embarrass himself the way Gore did.

[zachs]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Exactly. But let him keep all the hope he has.
I am going to be watching this forum come election night .
I bet you'll either see zach on here ranting how it was somehow unfair that Bush won.
I wonder if the Dems will try to play the crybaby game again.
Naw, I don't think they Kerry wants to embarrass himself the way Gore did.

I will congratulate the winner, whomever that might be. Kerry or Bush.

You can hold me to that.

[zachs]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Yep, they've been getting better and better lately.

Well, if you consider one poll showing Bush gaining to be "getting better and better".

Actually, for the past several months, it wasn't getting better.
It was getting worse.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by zachs:
Well, if you consider one poll showing Bush gaining to be "getting better and better".

Actually, for the past several months, it wasn't getting better.
It was getting worse.

There was a time it got worse, but briefly. He was still above 50%. The majority still has always been FOR him.

[zachs]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
There was a time it got worse, but briefly. He was still above 50%. The majority still has always been FOR him.

No, actually he dipped below 50%.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by zachs:
No, actually he dipped below 50%.

I don't believe I have ever seen it dip below 50%. Not saying it hasn't. But I have never seen it.

Care to show me when this happened?

[zachs]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
I don't believe I have ever seen it dip below 50%. Not saying it hasn't. But I have never seen it.

Care to show me when this happened?

It did:

Bush's job-approval rating dipped below 50% for the first time in his presidency, to 49%, and his disapproval rating rose to a record 48%. His approval ratings for handling the economy, Iraq and health care all fell to near-record lows.

[Zimphire]

Ah 48-49% Heh.

And again, it did not last long did it?

It's even HIGHER now. And it's growing.

Don't think He doesn't have plans for the rest of the year to keep those numbers up.

Really he doesn't have to do anything. The Dems just keep coming with their "tactics" and no one will want to vote for anyone of them.

BTW you know that was an USA/Today poll right?

Check this out

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politic...todaypolls.htm

Doesn't look good for Kerry now.

[zachs]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Ah 48-49% Heh.

And again, it did not last long did it?

It's even HIGHER now. And it's growing.

Don't think He doesn't have plans for the rest of the year to keep those numbers up.

Really he doesn't have to do anything. The Dems just keep coming with their "tactics" and no one will want to vote for anyone of them.

Yup. I guess Bush will just keep misrepresenting Kerry's positions in his ads.

BTW you know that was an USA/Today poll right?

Check this out

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politic...todaypolls.htm

Doesn't look good for Kerry now.

Yeah, and before it didn't look good for Bush.
Like I said, polls aren't static. They change. What the polls say today could be completely different tomorrow.

[hyteckit]

Based on the current polls and data anaylasis, Pres. Bush will likely lose in November. Sorry guys, Pres. Bush will lose. Look at the Gallup poll and interpret it yourself.

http://www.gallup.com/content/default.aspx?ci=11101

"This is not totally good news for the president because his current 50% rating, albeit higher than his father's at this point in 1992, is still not robust by any means. If an incumbent's job approval rating falls below 50% in an election year, then it historically has been the death knell for that president's re-election chances."

The only chance Pres. Bush might win the re-election is if the job market and economy picks up really well. Job market still sucks as hell.

[hyteckit]

Oh, for those who are a little slow.

Here is Pres. Bush Job approval rating:

Dec. 2003 - 58%
Jan. 2004 - 55%
Feb. 2004 - 51%
Mar. 2004 - 50%


See the pattern?

Source:

http://www.gallup.com/content/default.aspx?ci=11101

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by hyteckit:
Oh, for those who are a little slow.

Here is Pres. Bush Job approval rating:

Dec. 2003 - 58%
Jan. 2004 - 55%
Feb. 2004 - 51%
Mar. 2004 - 50%


See the pattern?

Source:

http://www.gallup.com/content/default.aspx?ci=11101

Polls before elections are volatile. Clinton's numbers were roughly the same as Bush's in 1996. In the early part of 1984, Reagan was trailing Mondale (remember him?). Carter also lead Reagan until just before the 1980 election. Anyone who thinks that they can extrapolate a trend from poll numbers is a fool or just hasn't lived through enough elections.

I realize that coaches throughout the country recommend trash talk as a way to psych out the other team. But that's all this is. You will just have to wait until November like the rest of us.

[voodoo]

Yes well I've seen enough elections to know that polls 6+ months prior to the election are worth a pair of dingo's kidneys.

On the other hand, they make a fun topic of discussion on internet message boards.

GWB is not Reagan and Kerry is no Mondale.. that would be an unfair comparison and would make a really boring elections. I want FUN elections. That is why I like these 50/50 polls that are piling up.

[hyteckit]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Polls before elections are volatile. Clinton's numbers were roughly the same as Bush's in 1996. In the early part of 1984, Reagan was trailing Mondale (remember him?). Carter also lead Reagan until just before the 1980 election. Anyone who thinks that they can extrapolate a trend from poll numbers is a fool or just hasn't lived through enough elections.

I realize that coaches throughout the country recommend trash talk as a way to psych out the other team. But that's all this is. You will just have to wait until November like the rest of us.

No doubt that it is volatile. If 300,000 new jobs are created each month for the next 3 months, I'm sure Pres. Bush job approval rating will go up double digits. Polls do serve a purpose and I do see a trend. Hey, why don't you tell Gallup organization that they are fools.

Who's Mondale? Sorry, wasn't old enough to know.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by zachs:
Yup. I guess Bush will just keep misrepresenting Kerry's positions in his ads.



Yeah, and before it didn't look good for Bush.
Like I said, polls aren't static. They change. What the polls say today could be completely different tomorrow.

And Kerry will misrepresent Bush's. They're both scum, Kerry's just of the Beltway variety scum and Bush is the Texas variety scum... given the two choices in crap, the Texas type doesn't have as much of a track record of screwing over the American public.

[hyteckit]

Oh, for SimeyTheLimey the fool who can't see the trend from data that doesn't need to be extrapolate.


Pres. Bush Job approval rating:

Dec. 2003 - 58%
Jan. 2004 - 55%
Feb. 2004 - 51%
Mar. 2004 - 50%


Economic Outlook:

Dec. 2003 - 28%
Jan. 2004 - 27%
Feb. 2004 - 13%
Mar. 2004 - -3%

Satisfy with the way things are:

Dec. 2003 - 50%
Jan. 2004 - 51%
Feb. 2004 - 45%
Mar. 2004 - 39%


Basically a downward trend for Pres. Bush in all areas and the Bush Admin is scared. The only way to turn the trend around is to improve the economy and job market.

If you can't see the trend, you either don't know what the definition of trend means or you are blind.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by hyteckit:
Oh, for SimeyTheLimey the fool who can't see the trend from data that doesn't need to be extrapolate.


Pres. Bush Job approval rating:

Dec. 2003 - 58%
Jan. 2004 - 55%
Feb. 2004 - 51%
Mar. 2004 - 50%


Economic Outlook:

Dec. 2003 - 28%
Jan. 2004 - 27%
Feb. 2004 - 13%
Mar. 2004 - -3%

Satisfy with the way things are:

Dec. 2003 - 50%
Jan. 2004 - 51%
Feb. 2004 - 45%
Mar. 2004 - 39%


Basically a downward trend for Pres. Bush in all areas and the Bush Admin is scared. The only way to turn the trend around is to improve the economy and job market.

If you can't see the trend, you either don't know what the definition of trend means or you are blind.

I can see a trend. Bush has very high approval ratings during the unusual period after 9/11, and they have now come down to a more normal level. And secondly, the economy is emerging from a recession.

There are two things here. First, you are cherry picking a rather balanced article to find facts that fit your thesis. For example, look at their paragraph on economic optimism in 1992 compared to 2004. It's very different.

Clearly 1992 began with a very negative assessment of this dimension, with an amazing 71% saying that the economy was getting worse, compared with only 22% who said it was getting better (a net negative 51%). On the other hand, Americans began 2004 with a much more positive outlook -- 66% said the economy was getting better and 27% said it was getting worse. But the public has become more negative. In Gallup's March 8-11 poll, 47% of Americans said the economy was getting worse, while 44% said it was getting better (a net negative of 3%). In April 1992, by way of contrast, the public actually became more optimistic about the economy, and there was a one-time sharp uptick in optimism (to a net negative 5%). By June 1992, however, the public had become more negative again, with the confidence rating dropping to net negative 33%.

All in all, the data suggest that Bush No. 41 was operating much more in a negative economic environment in 1992 than Bush No. 43 is in 2004 -- at least so far.

Secondly, you are trying to extrapolate polling data to an election that is months away. Gallup wouldn't do that, and in fact their article says several times that it is impossible to do so. If you think that you can predict the future in that way, then I suggest that you play the stock market. A few irrationally optimistic investors are just what the economy needs.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by zachs:
Yup. I guess Bush will just keep misrepresenting Kerry's positions in his ads.

LOL!!!!!!! No THAT is classic!

I am going to keep that quote. THX

Yeah, and before it didn't look good for Bush.
Like I said, polls aren't static. They change. What the polls say today could be completely different tomorrow.

And I never said otherwise. I just said THINGS ARE LOOKING GOOD FOR BUSH. And they are.

Oh Master Of the Obvious.

[voodoo]

I will enjoy it thoroughly when Kerry becomes president

I really shouldn't but I will.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by voodoo:
I will enjoy it thoroughly when Kerry becomes president

I really shouldn't but I will.

Your going to be crying in when he loses.

Not sure if it will be in a pillow, or not though.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Your going to be crying in when he loses.

Not sure if it will be in a pillow, or not though.

Well if I'll be crying it'll be from happiness and joy when Kerry wins.

Oh and my pillows are all fine and unbitten over here. I can see why you'd worry about the state of the pillows though

[BRussell]

Here's a graph of Bush's approval ratings based on the average of 10 polls;


Notice the spikes - 9/11, Iraq, Saddam. He seems to need something to happen for his approval rating to go up, otherwise it just sinks. It's like hitting a balloon that just keeps falling. I bet they're really hoping to nab Osama to get another one of those spikes.

[ghost_flash]

Originally posted by BRussell:
Here's a graph of Bush's approval ratings based on the average of 10 polls;


Notice the spikes - 9/11, Iraq, Saddam. He seems to need something to happen for his approval rating to go up, otherwise it just sinks. It's like hitting a balloon that just keeps falling. I bet they're really hoping to nab Osama to get another one of those spikes.

That's how politics works. Glad you finally caught on! Welcome, friend.

"Johny Come Lately" - You and John Kerry have something in common.

[Dakar]

Originally posted by BRussell:
Here's a graph of Bush's approval ratings based on the average of 10 polls;


Notice the spikes - 9/11, Iraq, Saddam. He seems to need something to happen for his approval rating to go up, otherwise it just sinks. It's like hitting a balloon that just keeps falling. I bet they're really hoping to nab Osama to get another one of those spikes.

I suspect the capture of Osama should get at least an Iraq sized spike.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by ghost_flash:
That's how politics works. Glad you finally caught on! Welcome, friend.

"Johny Come Lately" - You and John Kerry have something in common.

I don't know if that is normally the way it works. For example, Clinton, at the height of the Lewinsky scandal, had higher approval numbers than W. after winning the war in Iraq. Reagan also remained high throughout his term. Some politicians, like Reagan and Clinton, have a reservoir of support, a basic appeal to the American people. Bush clearly doesn't have that. He needs good news to get support, otherwise he dips to around 50%.

BTW, let's stipulate that polls like this have nothing to do with the rightness or wrongness of his policies. I think more often than not, when the American public strongly supports something, it's a good bet that it's a bad idea.

[SimeyTheLimey]

From a historical point of view, this is kind of interesting.



What's notable is how volatile these percentages are, and how little it seems to track with whether a president gets reelected or not. Truman is the classic example of an unpopular president who was reelected. People also forget how unpopular Reagan was for much of his first term. Conversely, Bush I and Ford were both pretty popular through most of their presidencies, but look what good that did them.

The other thing is that all the action is in the 50-70% range. That's not a lot to play with when the country is basically split 50-50. You really are talking about a small number of undecideds shifting percentages the bulk of which is made up of people whose opinions remain fairly fixed by their partisan leanings.

Anyway, here are some truths from liberal journalist Mark Shields from a little while ago when the numbers seemed to go the other way.

Let's begin with the despondent Democrats of Washington who, at the end of 2003, can best be described as nervous Nellies with weak knees and cold feet.

Have they forgotten or do they not know that the last Democrat to challenge a sitting Republican president, on April 1 of the election year, had the support of just 25 percent of voters and trailed the incumbent by 20 points? That, of course, was Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton, who, as late as June of 1992, had just 24-percent support and was running third behind both President George H.W. Bush and independent Ross Perot.

In November 1992, Bill Clinton won the White House with 43 percent of the national vote to George H.W. Bush's 37 percent. (All poll figures used are from national public surveys conducted by the respected Gallup Organization.)

Presidential polls 11 months before an election have all the permanence of figures written in wet sand at the ocean's edge, waiting for the next tide.

Just ask President Jimmy Carter or those who worked for his challenger, Ronald Reagan. In January 1980, Carter led Ronald Reagan by 62 percent to 33 percent. By early June, the "Gipper" had seen his share of the national vote "climb" all the way up to 32 percent. On Election Day, Reagan defeated Carter 51 percent to 41 percent.

Poll numbers can switch both ways: On July 24, 1988, Democratic nominee Michael Dukakis led his Republican opponent, George H. W. Bush, by 54 percent to 37 percent. Bush won in November by 53 percent to 46 percent.

Link He's right. The numbers are not useful to predict elections.

[ghost_flash]

Originally posted by BRussell:
I don't know if that is normally the way it works. For example, Clinton, at the height of the Lewinsky scandal, had higher approval numbers than W. after winning the war in Iraq. Reagan also remained high throughout his term. Some politicians, like Reagan and Clinton, have a reservoir of support, a basic appeal to the American people. Bush clearly doesn't have that. He needs good news to get support, otherwise he dips to around 50%.

BTW, let's stipulate that polls like this have nothing to do with the rightness or wrongness of his policies. I think more often than not, when the American public strongly supports something, it's a good bet that it's a bad idea.

Don't confuse American's passion for Tabloid TV shows alla Clinton with Patriotism after Bush's win in Iraq.

Your oppinion is severely slanted and that is obvious.

You lost me at the end as well, as you only show your ignorance of the American People.
So, you think they supported BC during L. scandal, and it was a bad thing? Weird.
My explanation goes much further than your conjecture.

[hyteckit]

Originally posted by BRussell:
Here's a graph of Bush's approval ratings based on the average of 10 polls;


Notice the spikes - 9/11, Iraq, Saddam. He seems to need something to happen for his approval rating to go up, otherwise it just sinks. It's like hitting a balloon that just keeps falling. I bet they're really hoping to nab Osama to get another one of those spikes.

Wow, looks really bad for Pres. Bush. Note the general downward trend after the gigantic surge during post 9/11 and how each surge is getting smaller. Now that's a trend I'm happy to see.

[Spliffdaddy]

Let me make sure I understand all this stuff.

Nobody likes Dubya now, yet he has the same percentage of support that he had when he won in 2000.

Nobody likes Dubya now, yet the Democrats don't have a candidate that Americans like more than Dubya.

In order for a Democrat to succeed, a Republican must first fail?


I think I understand.

[hyteckit]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Let me make sure I understand all this stuff.

Nobody likes Dubya now, yet he has the same percentage of support that he had when he won in 2000.

Nobody likes Dubya now, yet the Democrats don't have a candidate that Americans like more than Dubya.

In order for a Democrat to succeed, a Republican must first fail?


I think I understand.

Yup, you nailed it in the head.

Go Bush! Go Cheney! Continue the trend!

[Dakar]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
In order for a Democrat to succeed, a Republican must first fail?

In a reelection yes. If enough people feel the sitting president hasn't done a good job they vote him out of office.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Dakar:
In a reelection yes. If enough people feel the sitting president hasn't done a good job they vote him out of office.

Right, Dems can't get elected because on their own merits. They have to get elected on the lack of others.