Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Kerry 45% Bush 44% (Rasmussen Reports)
RasmussenReports.com ^ | Friday, January 30, 2004 | Rasmussen Reports

Posted on 01/30/2004 4:27:51 PM PST by Momaw Nadon

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-115 last
To: dogbyte12
Gotta be careful with Rasmussen. For those around from 2000, his poll was called Portrait of America. While everybody else had the race as being extremely tight, Rasmussen had Bush blowing out Gore.

True, but he was just about right state-wise, and only missed significantly in the ones that had massive voter fraud.

If this election will be close, it will be due to voter fraud and that alone. This poll is absurd. Most people in America have no idea who John Kerry is.

101 posted on 01/31/2004 6:39:09 PM PST by 1L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: 1L
Most people in America have no idea who John Kerry is.

On the contrary, it appears that a major percentage of New Hampshire Republicans know exactly who he is.

102 posted on 01/31/2004 8:45:35 PM PST by Don Joe ("Bush owes the 'base' nothing." --Texasforever, 01/28/2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
Thanks for the link. Interesting how they pieced together various credible news sources to come to their conclusion, one that I think might hold water. I'm not totally convinced, but like I said before, I won't be totally convinced 'til I see OBL in chains.
103 posted on 02/01/2004 5:49:32 AM PST by randog (Everything works great 'til the current flows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Don Joe
Since you didn't refute my claim, "on the contrary" makes not sense. And I think you and the nation thing might be a little naive if you don't think at least some, if not a good percentage, of those so-called Republican voters were simply trying to muck things up in the RAT primary. There's no reason to participate in the Republican primary, and they can't require a RAT primary voter to vote for a RAT in the general, can they?
104 posted on 02/01/2004 8:29:32 PM PST by 1L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: 1L; George W. Bush
Since you didn't refute my claim, "on the contrary" makes not sense. And I think you and the nation thing might be a little naive if you don't think at least some, if not a good percentage, of those so-called Republican voters were simply trying to muck things up in the RAT primary.

Thank you for confirming that you didn't read the article.

It was talking about the Republican primary -- and only registered Republicans were allowed to vote in it. Registered Democrats, and Registered Independents could vote in the Democrat Primary. With the heat on the RAT race, it doesn't take a slide rule to figure out that every mother loving RAT was staying in his primary that day.

Next time, don't shoot from the lip. You can pretend, if you like, that large numbers of real Republicans aren't being alienated right now. That won't change the fact that they are, of course. But, it's a free country, and you're more than welcome to whistle past the graveyard if you like.

Attacking me for sounding the alarm, though... that's not very productive. Shooting the messenger went out of vogue a long time ago. And even if you succeed, it doesn't do a bloody thing for you.

The GOP is at a crossroads. It can try to strongarm Republicans into voting for it, or, it can listen to the frustration from the hustings, and start throwing some meat to its constituents. That's not my choice, that's not your choice, that's their choice. The outcome depends on them.

Pretending that everything is hunkey dory, and shouting (or shooting!) down the messenger ain't gonna help anyone but the RATs.

I've said my peace on the matter.

105 posted on 02/01/2004 10:56:36 PM PST by Don Joe ("Bush owes the 'base' nothing." --Texasforever, 01/28/2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: 1L; Don Joe
Well, fellas, I'd say that crazy season has arrived if we're looking for evidence on GOP voters at The Nation or taking Rasmussen polls seriously, especially nine months out from the election.

If you guys want to spar for some fun, fine enough. But it seems to me you might try to find something better to spar over.

The discontent in the party is over the spending and growth of government, the classic Reagan agenda. In this sense, the core of the party is still focused on spending and size of government.

Rove is trying, with some success, to make any and all disagreements about Bush. It is a focus upon personality which is intended to give big-spending congress-RINOs some 'cover' while they spend even more.

Here at FR, we see it in the bots who act like a little girl screaming that some bad man is threatening their dolly. And the other bots delight in playing the boogeyman, torturing the little dolly.

It's a distraction.

Ignore the personality of our president. He's doing fine in his constitutionally assigned duties as commander in chief, overseer of foreign policy and executive of the civil service. We might not be happy over the judges issue but I blame Rove/Frist/Lott for cowardice and for political strategizing on the issue at least as much if not more than this president.

So, in this election year, it's about the spending. Like it usually is. And Bush can't write the checks. So we must focus on the guys with the checkbook: Congress.

Bush is actually irrelevant in this anyway. It's between Congress and their own voters. Complain if you want but that's what the Constitution says.

It's a long time until election anyway. Find your proper target, take aim, shoot.
106 posted on 02/02/2004 12:05:10 AM PST by George W. Bush (It's the Congress, stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush
Well except for your comparison of the Reagan Agenda to the Bush agenda, I agree with all you said.
107 posted on 02/02/2004 12:11:27 AM PST by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
Okay. Admittedly I took a little license to paint with a broad stroke there (you seem to be referring to another post I made on another thread though; my #106 didn't mention Reagan). It's easier not to fight over personalities if we don't have to. And we don't have to when it comes to this spending and growth of discretionary spending.

Like my tagline says...

And doing anything to further obsession with personality is unhealthy for our goals. Personalities come and go. Just like many Reagan followers were unhappy after he was gone, so will many Bush followers when he's gone from office. In the end, we have our principles or we'll have nothing.

Principles first, personalities second.
108 posted on 02/02/2004 12:23:59 AM PST by George W. Bush (It's the Congress, stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Don Joe
Thank you for confirming that you didn't read the article.

I read it. I just don't take the nation seriously. If you look at the raw data, you will see Bush got some votes in the RAT primary. Not many, but some. And the total number of non-Bush votes in the Rep. primary totaled a whopping 15%. I'm not sure the total number of registered voters in the entire state, but in 1996, there were about 750K. Assuming the number is the same, less than about 10% voted in the Rep. primary and less than or about a third voted in the RAT primary. I still contend that regardless of what primary they were voting in, and to the contrary of your's and the idiot nations' assertions, the 8300 so called Republicans that voted for someone other than Bush were mostly either uninformed (i.e., they thought they HAD to vote for a RAT since that was really the only contested election), or intentionally trying to mess things up.

You are terribly wrong if you are making the assumption that everyone who voted knew exactly what they were doing, so whether or not they were "able" to mess things up doesn't mean that wasn't their intention.

109 posted on 02/02/2004 10:20:47 AM PST by 1L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: TaxRelief
Yep, and the best is the McCain statement, where he says Kerry comprimised our POW's during the war, with his rhetoric marching and spewing facts from his days as a Soldier, in the Jane Fonda anti-war rallies.

Ops4 God BLess america!
110 posted on 02/02/2004 10:23:14 AM PST by OPS4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
Just the mere thought of her as first lady is embarrassing.

Why? She takes her foundation work very seriously, provides support for her husband while having a mind of her own, and does not seem to be the type who would criticize people.

I really wish those who criticize people instead of positions would stop it. Stick to ideas and the positive reasons to vote for GWB.

111 posted on 02/02/2004 10:25:27 AM PST by grania ("Won't get fooled again")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jorge
He wrote a book, The New Soldier, on which appeared a flag upside down. His testimony to congress after his return from Vietnam has been posted on FR recently. It's a real eye-opener. His voting record is to the left of Ted Kennedy. As someone recently said, Ted Kennedy is the conservative senator from Mass. Kerry is a very scary man!
112 posted on 02/02/2004 10:25:42 AM PST by twigs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: grania
Why? She takes her foundation work very seriously, provides support for her husband while having a mind of her own, and does not seem to be the type who would criticize people.

You need to look closer at the Bride Of Franken-Kerry.

She's like some kind of heavily narcotized Eurotrash artiste. Like a bad cross between Hillary! and Lina Wertmuller.

Think 'Hillary II'.
113 posted on 02/02/2004 1:00:48 PM PST by George W. Bush (It's the Congress, stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: grania
Uh..................yeah. If you can't recognize class or extreme lack thereof, it says all that needs to be said about your judgment.
114 posted on 02/02/2004 4:38:52 PM PST by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
U.S. officials denied the rumor 16 days ago and since then criminal activity of the Bush Administration has been dominating the news. Too bad for your guy that Scooter Libby and other treasonists who exposed Valerie Plame will be doing a perp walk before OBL!
115 posted on 02/07/2004 7:05:38 AM PST by MurryMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-115 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson