Posted on 05/14/2004 2:00:26 PM PDT by KQQL
That development appears to be helping Sen. John Kerry, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. He wins the support of 51 percent of likely voters, compared to 46 percent for Bush. In February, Bush was ahead of Kerry by two percentage points.
If Independent Ralph Nader is among the choices, Kerry gets 49 percent, Bush 44 percent and Nader 6 percent.
Bush's overall job approval rating fell from 49 percent to 46 percent since the last CNN/Time poll on April 8, while his disapproval rating rose from 47 percent to 49 percent -- the first time that more people disapproved of Bush's job performance than approved.
The poll was conducted by telephone Wednesday and Thursday.
The margin of error for the total sample of 1,001 adult Americans is 3.1 percentage points
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Your attitude bores me. Go bitch to the Bush campaign if you think they stink. I'm sure they can use someone with your successful record of running political campaigns. I mean, they defeated (albiet barely) an incumbant Vice-President running on a strong economic record, they gained seats in the House and Senate for the first time in modern history in their first major national election after winning the Presidency, and have already raised record amounts of money for the 2004 election which you've already determined is lost despite being six months away. But they obviously have no idea what they're doing now, so give 'em a call. Nothing like a good dose of unconstructive bitching to jumpstart a political campaign.
Your data set is two points? This could end up like Ford. He was a mid-40 president who lost.
We might have a balanced budget. The horror.
[/crickets chirping?]
I think we saw some of the CW on economic numbers fall in 2000 when computer models predicted an easy win for Gore. Take away the DUI story and the models look even more foolish.
There was some precedence for 2002-- with Clinton winning in 1998 despite expectations to the contrary. Also, that 62% job approval rating on Election Day 2002 made a prediction of a GOP night not exactly off the wall. If Bush were at 62% now, no one in their right mind would be predicting a Bush loss.
FYI...
"The July poll was a Newsweek poll with its own separate methodology that they merely commissioned with Gallup's call center (today they commission their polls from Princeton Associates).
I'm tired of telling you that so we should stop debating this topic."
--AntiGuv
MR. Kottter !
Bush has problems convincing people who aren't already in his camp that he's right. Giuliani does a great job doing this. He should give Bush some tutoring.
Steady leadership in a time of change. What, you need more? Greedy, greedy.
So incumbents merely have to will themselves to victory? Ummm... OK.
The problem is that the voters are sending a resounding message that "stay-the-course" is not enough.
Well as I have been telling people on FR. I got caught up in polls back in 2000 and got burned.
Things won't matter until after the conventions.
JMO, FWIW, people are a little antsy now(Prison scandal, Iraq, gas prices) but things will come into focus after labor day. This election is an important one for we are at war and that will be the main theme of this election.
Who can handle the war on terror better.
So says you as of 5/15/04. Like I said things will come into focus after the conventions and again JMO, the voters will take the issue of the war on terrorism very seriously.
I've never claimed I have the wisdom of God Himself.
IMO, with your writing style you sure do imply it.
Frank Luntz, the Republican pollster and political strategist, said yesterday that public opinion was clearly moving against the war: "The photographs projected everything the public thinks is wrong about the war and drowned out everything the public thinks is right . . .[The president] has to be concerned."
I'm not so partisan as to follow a leader anywhere. Party means nothing to me. I'm a registered Conservative, not really a one-issue voter (I've had to hold my nose a few times when pulling the lever, Pataki being one of those times), but the aggregate picture with Iraq, and the expansion of the State is worrisome to me.
The Conservative Ideal is not even really put out there for consumption by this Administration or the previous so-called Conservative administration. Maybe it can't and won't ever sell, but the least they could do is try.
Another thing that is worrisome to me is the lack of good jobs out there. I have a decent job, but many people looking aren't able to find one. I know the employment picture is looking up, but are they jobs comparable to the types of jobs we were creating in the 90s? From what I've been able to observe, I don't think so. And the electorate sees that too, hence their inability to get excited over the seemingly now not-jobless recovery.
It's pointless pretending that the electorate can be convinced that the economy is not the President's direct responsibility. He sets the tone, and that's about all, and I know that, but the electorate heaps praise on him when times are good, any President I've seen does not rebuff that praise and try to teach the electorate real economic lessons, so when things aren't looking that good he gets the lambasting too.
I don't even expect a corruption-free administration. Politics is a dirty business, and if you play you probably have the capacity to be a little dirty yourself or are going to get a little dirt on you during your tenure. We're all only too human. Depends on the kind of corruption. But no leader that I've seen yet, is above reproach.
We need a leader, the likes of which I don't see out there, and in the context of the troubles and dangers we face presently, I don't find a historical role model for, with the possible exception of Churchill. I say possible because I'm no historian where he's concerned, so I could be way off there too.
And lets clear some things up. I have never once said this election is over (or GWB has lost). In fact, I have said the exact opposite. That is is GWB race to lose (at the same time pointing out he is running a terribly lazy campaign). Raising money is not the only way to determine election success.
And understand he is not out-rasing Kerry (you are buying the media lie with that one). If you add up the 527's, the Unions, the two other large direct DNC organizations....plus the $100 million (to date) Kerry has raised....The DNC is well above GWB. (now throw in the over $600 million in free advertising the is given to Kerry through continual positive Kerry News and Negative GWB news...from the major outlets....and you should have an even clearer picture....The GWB camp isn't going to raise anywhere near the money Kerry will have to spend!).
Lastly I have not given nonconstructive criticism. I have suggested a number of things the GWB camp should have been doing or should do.
1. Coming up with new and creative ways to get good economic news out (it is a joke that most Americans still think we are in a recession...and even a bigger joke that you would still suggest the GWB camp is running a good campaign with this FACT).
2. The RNC should have had 527's up and running since the first DAY the DNC had theirs on the air. The fact is one of the main weapons of an incumbent...is to try and drive the "negatives" on the challenger UP....once a challengers numbers go up past the mid 40's....(history tells us they don't come back down)...What a better way to have driven Kerry's numbers up ...then with negative 527's..(they sure have worked on GWB approval numbers)...The RNC/GWB blew it hugely not having our own 527's up the past 4 months. NO EXCUSE!
3. The GWB camp should have come out with some type of "contract with minorities"....that would have focused like a laser beam on minority groups....Would have made the media pay attention and would have at least made the Dem's fight to not lose say even 5%...(the fact is if GWB can win 5 to 7% more of the African American vote this election....Kerry cannot win).....Have the contract with minorities be based on conservative principles....but with GWB touch.....It would have been brilliant (This was first offered as a option back in 2002....from a caller to Rush).
4. Having VP Cheney out more as a force. VP (who I love) has been almost nonexistent. This is a fact and has hurt the GWB camp.
Now these are just a few (I have listed more in other posts). What about you? You seem to just say....shut up...We are going to win (because I want us to)...and GWB is a pro....Give me a break.
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.