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

Skip to comments.

BUSH SURGES PAST KERRY IN POLL
New York Post ^ | 3/30/04 | BRIAN BLOMQUIST

Posted on 03/30/2004 1:05:01 AM PST by kattracks

Edited on 05/26/2004 5:20:26 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

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.


(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2004; kewl; polls; usatoday
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last
To: Allegra
What about 1984(every state but Minnesota went to Reagan)
21 posted on 03/30/2004 3:56:25 AM PST by mdmathis6 (The Democrats must be defeated in 2004...." MDMATHIS6, The Anti-Democrat")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman
I hope Kerry is not forced to drop out.
22 posted on 03/30/2004 3:57:40 AM PST by tkathy (Our economy, our investments, and our jobs DEPEND on powerful national security.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: jocon307
Who would have been better, really?

I think Joe Lieberman was hands down their best candidate. He would have given Dubya a run for his money, and I'd have felt confident he would have done his best to keep our nation safe. (No, I would not have voted for him over Pres. Bush.) But the libs were so heck-bent on being anti war, they shoved him aside. Very dumb move.

23 posted on 03/30/2004 4:07:05 AM PST by Coop ("Hero" is the last four-letter word this veteran would use to describe John Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Coop
Lieberman had nothing this year or four years ago. He's the self-proclaimed "conscience" of the Senate, and he's got the same baggage as Kerry with a worse delivery.

Frankly, I think that the senator from NC might have been more trouble for Bush but only for a minute.

24 posted on 03/30/2004 4:22:43 AM PST by Thebaddog (Woof!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe
"a sign the Bush campaign's ads are taking a toll."

It MIGHT actually be a sign, that Kerry's weaknesses are beginning to take a toll. Or that people are fed up with liberal media shenanigans (sp?) like the Richard Clarke nonesense. Gotta love the subtle, negative spin democrats put on good news.

25 posted on 03/30/2004 4:25:17 AM PST by paulsy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
...meaning he has not been dragged down politically by the criticism from former counterterrorism aide Richard Clarke [and the partisan media]...

First, the vast majority of people have enough common sense to understand what led to the 911 attacks and who should be held accountable. Second, the Clarke attack against the administration was a well-coordinated media-assisted election year fraud. Last, the 911 Commission hearings have deteriorated into an inside-the-beltway made-for-TV partisan mini-series that most folks have largely ignored.

BTW, why isn't Bill Clinton under oath and testifying to the commission? Could it be executive privilege?

26 posted on 03/30/2004 4:38:11 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer (The democRATS are near the tipping point.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Allegra
"I want a LANDSLIDE. I want 1972 all over again.I was way too young to vote in that one."

You very well might see one. Off the top of my head, I can think of two other Republicans who were in office during a time of war-Lincoln (1864) and Nixon (1972). Both these wars, and the sitting presidents who presided over them, were seen as unpopular by anti-war Democrat opposition.
27 posted on 03/30/2004 4:39:30 AM PST by wingman1 (University of Vietnam '70)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: wingman1
Both these wars, and the sitting presidents who presided over them, were seen as unpopular by anti-war Democrat opposition.

Ah, yes...the peace freaks of the 60s. The modern-day version, like the unwashed who participate in A.N.S.W.E.R. marches want so much to be like them.

I've been involved in FReeping those people. They really can be quite entertaining.

If you laugh at stupid things like I do.

28 posted on 03/30/2004 4:45:50 AM PST by Allegra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Expect intensified stridor from the Propaganda Machine (i.e. the Mainstream Press). They can't let naked Truth reach the electorate! Get out your ear plugs; they're ratcheting up the volume!
29 posted on 03/30/2004 4:57:37 AM PST by Savage Beast (Was it "Love Story" that was written about John Kerry? Or was it "Washington Square"?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
"BUSH SURGES PAST KERRY IN POLL"

I like this headline. USA today reporting on the same poll, had a headline that said, "Bush Credibility Down" You had to read till the fifth paragraph of their report to find out that Bush led Kerry by four percentage points in a head-to head matchup.

30 posted on 03/30/2004 4:58:29 AM PST by lstanle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Allegra
Wow! Just checked your site. Stay safe.
31 posted on 03/30/2004 5:01:49 AM PST by wingman1 (University of Vietnam '70)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Looking at the whole situation, I'm just in shock that they picked someone like kerry. They simply picked the least appealing one, by far. Edwards would've been 100x the candidate that kerry is.
32 posted on 03/30/2004 5:04:03 AM PST by Monty22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wingman1
Wow! Just checked your site. Stay safe.

Thanks. We try. :)

Looks like you've been there and done a little of that, too, in the past. On the "real deal" end of it.

Thank you for your service to our great country.

33 posted on 03/30/2004 5:11:34 AM PST by Allegra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
A sign the Bush ads are taking a toll." Have a feeling, Kerry helps Bush as well; the drone of his relentless attacks and his ugly demeanor; surely have some voters rethinking their future.
34 posted on 03/30/2004 5:12:36 AM PST by cricket (The Democrats and the terrorists have a common enemy. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
Maybe it will help Kerry when he has some yellow removed from his back with surgery this week.
35 posted on 03/30/2004 5:13:24 AM PST by Big Horn (A waist is a terrible thing to mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

This is exactly what I fear...that JF'nK will withdraw at the last minute because of "health reasons" (he wants to live) and Hellery will be over-whelmingly drafted to save the nation...gag. That would be extremely exciting to every woman who wants government to take care of them, a considerable voting block, as well as every pants-wetting leftist who hates Bush. I do hope that somewhere there is a "Plan B" in Karl Rove's files for this event.
36 posted on 03/30/2004 5:14:54 AM PST by kittymyrib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman
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

Indeed. Bush should save his best stuff on the worst of Kerry until all the 'Rats reluctantly pile on to his garbage scow, and then light a match under all the powder kegs this arrogant and elitist traitor has piled up since the 70's.

37 posted on 03/30/2004 5:20:50 AM PST by guitfiddlist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
ZZZOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMM!

Did you see that?

LANDSLIDE! BUSH 2004!
38 posted on 03/30/2004 5:22:58 AM PST by Enduring Freedom (Start buyin' before the boom leaves you cryin' - LANDSLIDE! BUSH 2004!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jocon307
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.

Which leads to the question - will 2004 be the election loss that sends them over the edge?
Some of the rabid leftists you see on other (ahem DUh) boards advocate violence, assassination, etc.
It might be worth logging them after the election results come in and make sure the FBI is made aware of the threats.

39 posted on 03/30/2004 5:26:17 AM PST by MrB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: onyx
"Hurray for the sane 67%..."

Honestly, the Dem's are basing there hopes on a unrealistic notion that electorate will believe that Bush, in his first nine months in office, was supposed to have identified and corrected all the collective failures, of all previous administrations, over the past thirty years (with regard to terrorism).

American's might not be the brightest bunch in the world, but to expect them to swallow this line of bulls**t is rather absurd.
40 posted on 03/30/2004 5:39:45 AM PST by PigRigger (Send donations to http://www.AdoptAPlatoon.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next 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