Posted on 06/08/2004 5:45:53 PM PDT by Eurotwit
Just a general FYI: James Zogby is not the same as the pollster John Zogby..
Zogby is full of crap.
>>Just a general FYI: James Zogby is not the same as the pollster John Zogby..
But aren't they related? This one is as full of it as the other one is.
his brother I believe.
Strategery is working.
11. There was a major military or foreign policy success;
Afghanistan was a success, but the situation in Iraq will dominate it. Whatever happens in Iraq as we get closer to the election will determine whether Bush can lay claim to key #11. (I think he'll win it, but the situation is by no means assured for him).
Lichtman is so biased left that for him to have to admit that Bush is likely to win the election, Bush must be doing very well indeed.......
It's all figured out, we don't need no stinkin elections, seriesly!
One brother says Kerry will win and the other says Bush will win. Looks like a Zogby will win regardless.
If by "fluid" they mean that certain RATs are starting to wet themselves on a daily basis, I would have to agree.
If Bush's numbers are improving - why isn't he showing the improved numbers .. if Kerry's were improving even 1 point, they would be making hay out of it.
Maybe the improvement is WAAAAAAAAY beyond what they were expecting.
According to the US Dept. of Commerce Bush gets key #6 as well.
As to key #7, I would find it hard to believe that anyone could say our foreign policy regarding terrorism is not the result of "major policy changes". This is in addition to reversing eight years of tax hikes.
I have to assume that professor Lichtman is swallowing the liberal Kool-aid when he says we have had major military or foreign policy failures. I'm not sure how conquering 2 countries in 2 years constitutes a failure. Doing this in spite of wide spread opposition makes this more of a success not less.
Kerry's Election to loseBut it was pollster John Zogby who gave the most intriguing briefing. Zogby has to be taken seriously because he got it right when almost all the pollsters had it wrong in 2000. He also caught the slight tilt toward the Republicans on the eve of the 2002 elections.
What he told the group upset most of them -- but his message came through loud and clear. While most pollsters view this election as Bush's to lose, he believes this election is Kerry's to lose.
He said that usually at this time of year, 20-25% of the electorate is undecided, but this year there only 5% of the electorate is undecided. Finding such people when polling is becoming exceedingly difficult, he told us. Moreover, the soft vote, that is the people who MIGHT be persuaded to vote for the other guy, is only 10% -- a historic low.
Let's call a spade a spade...The perceived setbacks were manufactured by the left, rehashed at times, intentionally slanderous and fabricated at others.
This is another example of the media beating a false drum, creating a false impression, and then using the polling from that false impression (only when it comports with their brainwashing) as evidence of their preconceived conclusion. The media and the DNC then use this doctored perception to beat Republicans over the head, demoralize the country and the troops, and finally give our enemies proof that their wonten killing is effective.
1. The Incumbent party holds more seats in the US House of Representatives after the mid-term election;
Bush gets this one as the GOP has a majority in the House. So that makes one for Bush.
2. There is no real contest for the incumbent nomination;
Again this favors Bush. That makes two for Bush.
3. The incumbent-party is the current president;
This is true. So that makes three for Bush.
4. There is no real third-party;
Oddly this actually works for Bush this year according to the system Bush loses this one. So it remains 3 for Bush.
5. The economy is not in recession;
This is true. That makes it four for Bush.
6. Per capita economic growth is improving;
Let's see, we were in a recession. We are now experience growth. To my mind a positive number is improving over a negative number? I do not see how they claim this is not another for Bush?????? So make it five for Bush.
7. The administration effected major policy changes;
Bush has been greatly criticized for making a major change in US foreign policy by announcing that he will not wait around to respond to each terrorist attack but will take the war to the terrorist. Hard for me to understand how someone can be heavily criticized for making a major policy change and yet not get credit for this one. So make it six for Bush.
8. There is no major social unrest;
This one I guess is controversial, but I don't see any major social unrest? I see failed demonstrations after failed demostration. So the left is trying, but there is no major social unrest. That makes it seven for Bush.
9. The incumbent is untainted by major scandal;
One could quibble about this one too. The left has tried to make both the 9-11 terrorists attacks and the Iraqi prison situation a major. Still make it eight in Bush's favor.
10. There have been no major military or foreign policy failures;
I think this one favors Bush too, but for the sake of argument lets say the public's general perception is there has been a major foreign policy failure. So Bush's total stays at eight.
11. There was a major military or foreign policy success;
Certainly as others have said, Afghanistan or capturing Saddam count as success, so add one more. That makes it nine for Bush.
12. The incumbent is charismatic or a national hero; and
Probably not although after 9-11 he was viewed pretty heroically, so the total stays at nine in Bush's favor.
13. The challenger is not charismatic and not a national hero.
Boy the Dim's have read this list. They are trying here, but Kerry is not Ike or Grant so this one in favor of Bush. That makes the grand total by my count ten out of thirteen.
It could be 11 if the public perception of Iraq is that it is the success it is. It really is 12 since there is no third party that threatens Bush. So one can argue it is 12 out of 13 and there is not way Bush can change that he is not Ike or Grant.
"A series of books had been published revealing embarrassing information about his presidency."
Such as????
Wait until the majority of that $200M get spent promoting what has gone right in the past 12 months.
I live in Nevada, a so called swing state. I see three times as many ads by commie groups against W as I do W ads for him. Even with this, the last poll here showed Kerry down 11. Its probably a little too big to be realistic but with a 4-1 ad advantage for 8 solid months it should be Kerry, Kerry, Kerry.
The Sept. 11 commission provided a number of damaging challenges foolish commissioners whose silly antics made the public sympathetic to the administration.
And the Abu Ghraib nonscandal, coupled with an insurgent-driven a media concocted unraveling of the military situation in Iraq - all combined to deliver serious blows to had--despite media attempts to make them huge--absolutely no effect on Bushs leadership image.
Just tidying up.
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.