BUSH SURGES PAST KERRY IN POLL

New York Post ^ | 3/30/04 | BRIAN BLOMQUIST

[kattracks]

March 30, 2004 -- WASHINGTON - A new poll shows President Bush has gained 12 points on Democrat John Kerry in the last three weeks - a sign the Bush campaign's ads are taking a toll. In a two way-matchup, Bush leads Kerry, 51 percent to 47 percent, a 7-point gain for Bush and 5-point drop for Kerry, according to the USAToday/CNN poll.

[goldstategop]

John F. Seinfeld's approval ratings will only go downward. The President has seven months of campaign commercials to air and he'll define his opponent between now and the Democratic Convention.

[FranklinsTower]

And we have just begun to fight.

[I still care]

Dick Morris said that once a challenger's (as opposed to an incumbent's) negatives start to rise, they are in trouble. Because there is nothing they can really do to raise them.

[LdSentinal]

Gallup (3/26-3/28/2004)

President George W. Bush

Approval: 53%
Disapproval: 44%
Don't Know: 3%

Gallup (3/26-3/29/1992)

President George H.W. Bush

Approval: 41%
Disapproval: 51%
Don't Know: 7%

[dfwgator]

The Rats have to face the fact that they picked a real dud in Kerry.

[jocon307]

"The Rats have to face the fact that they picked a real dud in Kerry."

Who would have been better, really? They're real problem is they have no ideas, at least no good ones. They've just degenerated into a bunch of socialist power grabbers. They'd take over the country by force, if they could, and at some point they may try, because they sure aren't winning it on elections.

[Happy2BMe]

"A new poll shows President Bush has gained 12 points on Democrat John Kerry in the last three weeks - a sign the Bush campaign's ads are taking a toll."

Thougt you may wanna see this - ping.

[Republic]

NOTE TO DNC rats, liberal elites and other un-American jerks who depend upon the dumbed down folks for survival:

We are in this battle and intend upon flooding this nation with the truth. Spread your innendo and lies through your willing media propagandists ( NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC and CNN, NYT and LA Times, your DNC paid for radio stations, etc) all you want.....lie as much as possible, continuing your attempt to divide us along racial and economic lines. Never stop being who you are!

Cause as you expose your own yellow, festering underbelly, the truth flies stronger and with greater concentration out across this terrific nation. You are so out of touch, so incestuously interwoven within your own back slapping spores of anti-American sentiment and appeasement that you no longer relate to people who once believed in your party.

Your spokesmen are as openly horrific now, as your now fully evolved socialistic ends. John Kennedy would have shunned you faster than Zell Miller has recently done. Thank you for finally exposing who and what you are.

We are no longer silent. Our sentiments are upon our lips, at our protests and written upon our cars and yards and American flags that fly at our homes.

We love fighting an enemy so willing to expose itself. 'Bout time. Any party that would nominate a man with such an outstanding lack of character and steadfastness has much to learn about the deep and abiding good character of average joe Americans.

You have awakened a giant. Enjoy the ride.

Reality sucks, no? :^(

[Caipirabob]

The 2004 campaign begins in earnest...

[onyx]

67 percent - believes the administration should not have been expected to prevent the tragedy.

Hurray for the sane 67%.

[Allegra]

I want a LANDSLIDE.

I want 1972 all over again. I was way too young to vote in that one....I want to be PART of the landslide.

I want, I want, I want....

[Veritas01]

Screw polls, who's winning Kerry or Bush . . . you can't tell, they flip flog as much as Kerry does on policy.

[I still care]

The only one I really think would have given Bush a run for his money was maybe Lieberman, who was strong on defense, came from the old "morality" school.

Of course, you never know what the liberal media will pull out of its hat 4 days before the election. Maybe pictures of W dancing naked on top of a table or something. They are working hard at it, it's the only way they'll win.

[Jaxter]

"They'd take over the country by force, if they could, and at some point they
may try, because they sure aren't winning it on elections."

That's exactly why they want to take our guns from us.

[Alberta's Child]

The only one I really think would have given Bush a run for his money was maybe Lieberman . . .

Bush would have destroyed Lieberman, though perhaps for the wrong reasons.

America would never, ever elect a president who talks like Lieberman.

[goldstategop]

I disagree. Joe Lieberman would have been a difficult candidate to beat. But he had two strikes against him with the kooks and wackos who run the Democratic Party: he's for a strong military and he has strong religious views. That may have made him a good general election candidate but it made him look too Republican to Democratic primary voters. So they went with a secular liberal instead of a relatively conservative religious Democrat. Its their loss.

[Alberta's Child]

There is no way a candidate can project himself as a strong leader if his normal pattern of speech is a simpering whine. Lieberman may have looked perfectly fine as a dottering old fool in the U.S. Senate, but there was nothing even remotely "presidential" about his manner. No swagger, no drawl, no booming voice, etc.

[Vigilanteman]

You may be right. But Bush has to be careful not to deliver a knock-out punch until it is too late to pull a Torricelli. Remember, the president has always polled poorly against an unnamed Democrat. Since the sheeple are technically voting for a slate of electors and not candidates, it is entirely possible to run an unnamed Democrat.

[tkathy]

Lieberman was an awful vice presidential candidate for Gore. His voice is lightweight, and his appearance is lightweight.