[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%

[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.

[Oldeconomybuyer]

...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?

[Savage Beast]

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!

[lstanle]

"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.

[Monty22]

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.

[cricket]

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.

[Enduring Freedom]

ZZZOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMM!

Did you see that?

LANDSLIDE! BUSH 2004!

[JaguarXKE]

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.

And also showing that the people of America are too smart to fall for Kerry and the DemoRATs personal smear campaign! Rush was saying the other day that the Dems strategy now is to try and attack Bush, not on what they perceive is his weakness, but on his strength - the war on terror. Guess what, RATS, it isn't working! The Barbara Streisand (BS) about his guard service didn't work, the BS about "the worst job losses since Hoover" didn't work, the BS about the horrible economy didn't work, and the BS about him being weak on the war on terror sure as heck isn't going to work. But go ahead and keep trying! The more vitriol DemoRATs spew the stronger Bush gets!

Jag

[cinFLA]

"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.

With independent Ralph Nader included, Bush leads 49 percent to 45 percent, with Nader getting 4 percent, the poll found."

Are these Libertarians that would prefer Nader over Bush?

[Badeye]

Is this really surprising? Kerry was the "front runner" eight months ago. He was surpassed by every Democratic nominee at one point or another in the polls.

Krauthammer noted a couple of months ago this is simply the "weirdest, and weakest, Democratic field in history"....and he was right, as usual.

I suspect its going to be a wide margin of victory come November. Americans have been rejecting liberalism since Reagan stepped onto the stage in 1980, that hasn't changed, in fact its picked up speed. A glance at the thousands (yes, thousands) of elective office lost by Democrats / liberals in the past two decades shows this clearly.

As the saying goes, all politics are "local". On the local level, liberalism has been rejected, in dramatic fashion for two decades, folks.

You can look it up.

[normy]

What is interesting is that Nader takes two points from both.

[Quix]

IN AN EMAIL RE ITEMS THAT

*MIGHT*

HAVE IMPLICATIONS FOR BIBLICAL PROPHECY

was a section from a source that collects supposedly highly sourced

RUMOR MILL items . . . was the following horrifying bit--the Bush election part after the Syria bit:

---

Meanwhile, there are overseas publications indicating that the CIA is reporting to the President that Syria is becoming a major factor in the inability of US military forces to squelch the Al Qaeda insurgency inside Iraq.

[I SHARE THE FOLLOWING PARTICULARLY BECAUSE I'VE HAD A strong SENSE THAT THE ILLUMINATI HAD TO BE AT LEAST ANNOYED WITH BUSH FOR NOT FOLLOWING THEIR SCRIPT CLOSELY ENOUGH, FOR SOME TIME. I REMAIN A STRONG BUSH SUPPORTER. I BELIEVE HE'S TREADING AS FINE A LINE AS HE CAN TO DO GOOD IN A VERY TRYING HAZARDOUS TIME WHILE STILL STAYING ALIVE].

There are reports that the Illuminati are very, very
displeased with George Bush Jr and his team.


Bush Told To "Throw' Election to Democrats According to one inside speculator, the Illuminati plans had called for
a short quick war against Iraq that would lead to a short quick war against Syria and Iran, so that the US would control the Axis of Evil and then push on to control
Saudi oil also.

This didn't happen due to the Bush team fumbling the
Illuminati's plans. This fumbling around also happened to his father, who dutifully "threw" the election to Clinton in 1992 as a penalty for not finishing off his business partner, Saddam Hussein.


Now, the junior Bush has been told to "throw" the election to the Democrats. Early reports suggest that Jr. is resisting the "suggestion." Such resistance in the past, so we are told, has led to forcible removal, as in assassination or impeachment ala, Johnson, Nixon, and Clinton as prior examples. If this rumor is rue, then look
for something "really" embarrasing to surface before the election, or afterwards, a scandal involving Cheney, forcing his removal and then a scandal involving Bush and an impeachment + imminent conviction that forces a Bush resignation. Why that instead of an assassination?


If they don't like what they've got now, and should they not be able to "fix" the vote count, then assassination keeps the same team in-place and does no good.


However, a removal of Cheney could bring about a satisfactory replacement much like Gerald Ford was in 1974 when he came aboard and replaced Richard Nixon. Besides, an assassination of Bush Jr would not be usable to help an Illuminati cause, at least not that we can see, so we're inclined to think these "enlightened ones" won't try to bump Bush off.

Of course, there is always a "heart attack" or "stroke" that might also take care of the Bush problem performed at a supernatural level. Again, this is a rumor being kicked around, and we're not sure if we're buying into it or not, but it provides for a fascinating set of speculations if true.


http://aoreport.com/rumblingrumors_htm.html

[Lancey Howard]

BUMP!