BUSH VS. KERRY - IS IT REALLY THAT CLOSE?

InvestorsInsight ^ | July 6, 2004 | Gary D. Halbert

[CyberAnt]

"Their projection: BUSH 318 / KERRY 220"

I have not seen these numbers anywhere .. and FOX was showing Kerry ahead in the electoral for quite a while, and then they seemed to stop showing it .. or I just didn't happen to be watching when they showed it.

However, I agree with the author .. the Clintons probably don't want Kerry to win either and will do whatever possible to keep them from winning.

[Wondervixen]

I wouldn't want to be Kerry if he somehow wins in November. As dull as he is next to Edwards, it'll be like watching a LOSING football team with a boring quarterback...The media and public will be hounding him forevermore to bench himself in favor of the "dynamic" second-string guy, even though nobody knows if he's ready to run the team.

[JoeSixPack1]

Well if she is a trophy it must be the "booby prize" version.

A billion dollar "booby prize"!

[Jet Jaguar]

Well, we don't need the Clintons help. I see a Kerry jump to about 49% then a fall that will continue into November.

[Jet Jaguar]

Roger that.

[Smartass]

[Texasforever]

A billion dollar "booby prize"!

Yeah you can buy a lot of paper bags for that kind of change.

[chuckles]

One thing I wonder about is NY. They were the ones attacked. They had the most losses, lives and money. NJ might be another. If Bush comes out bluntly and says, " Do you really feel Kerry would be tougher on the terrorists than me?" Do you really want to take that chance knowing that NY is the best target for them? Maybe that would get some of them to "loose their religion" and switch, especially with Rudy campaining for Bush.

Just wishful thinking maybe, but they do have a repub gov and mayor. They have to know if Bin Hidin gets a nuke, NY or DC is the target. Kerry will want to negotiate or some such with a million people smoldering in a crater. We mustn't make a move without France and the UN you know.

Just swinging NY over to Bush would cinch it.

[SunkenCiv]

I don't think NY state is impossible for Bush, and he needs to work on California as well (both may be within reach), but he needs to widen leads, solidify support, and concentrate on the too close to call states for now.

George W. Bush will be reelected by a margin of at least ten per cent

[nopardons]

California is a much more likely swing than N.Y. and has more EC votes.

[lainde]

bump and thanks!

[GVnana]

I've never seen it published. Have to watch the show I think.

[MeekOneGOP]

Hear the Donkey Bray
(RealPlayer)

[Expletive deleted] !!!

[adam_az]

"Kerry may be almost broke by the time Bush has to even spend a penny of his Federal dollars "

Theres talk of Kerry opting out of Federal funding... ha ha ha. He thinks he can raise more $, but his big donors have already blown their load, so to speak...

[Valin]

Until the last few weeks, 2004 has been a near disaster for George W. Bush’s presidency.

And we now return you to the real world


Can Kerry Turn Things Around?

Sure. And the Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders could come over with a case of chocolate syrup and beg me for my hot monkey love.

[Valin]

Kerry needs to be more visible.

RIIIIGHT!
sarcasm

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[eureka!]

Coop, this article looks right up your alley. Hope you think so...

[dirtboy]

That would leave the door wide open for Hillary to run for president in 2008.

And Hillary certainly needs a wide opening.

[ER_in_OC,CA]

Great info, Dan. If Bush picks up MI, then a win is most likely.

How will 'labor' vote this year? Will the Dems play the labor-card right or will Edwards be painted as the business-killer=job-killer?