Missourians split on Kerry, Bush

The Kansas City Star ^ | July 22, 2004 | STEVE KRASKE

[COURAGE]

This is better than Zogby, but Bush must take Mo.

To realize that you are in trouble, you can change plans.

If the election was held today, which would be unconstitutional, it would be at least Kerry 282, Bush 218. I have no idea what Tennessee and Florida would be. Which is better than yesterday.

I hope Rove have something up his sleeves, because this Bush campaign is one or the worst I've seen. I'm hitting the panic button. People forgot 9/11.

[Coop]

I hope you don't take this the wrong way, but my three-year old has a stronger firmness of conviction than you. Grow a spine!

[Coop]

I forgot to compliment you yesterday on your Grim FReeper tag for our friend here. :-)

[Corin Stormhands]

It would be a cook screen name...

[Coop]

but Bush must take Mo.

No, he mustn't.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Don't believe the liberal Kansas City Star. It may or may not be true. All you know is that this is what they want you to think is true today.

[Coop]

It would be a cook screen name...

Not really. Betty Crocker or Chef BoyRD would be good cook screen names. :-)

[JLAGRAYFOX]

On election day: Bush=57%, Kerry=40%, Nader=3%. Go back to sleep, my friend, us big guys will take care of things!

[COURAGE]

The past two polls show Bush behind.

 

                      

Missouri 2004 Polls

Presidential Race - 11 Electoral College Votes

Poll | Date	Sample	MoE	Bush	Kerry	Nader	Spread	2000 Vote
KC Star | 7/13-20	600 R	4.0	44	46	-	Kerry +2	Bush +4
Zogby Interactive | 7/6-7/10	n/a	3.3	46.8	50.1	0.7	Kerry +3.3	-
SUSA | 7/6-7/8	755 L	3.6	48%	46	-	Bush +2	-
Rasmussen | 6/1-6/30	n/a	5.0	48	44	-	Bush +4	-
Zogby Interactive | 6/15-6/20	n/a	3.1	48.6	47.9	1.0	Bush +0.8	-
LA Times | 6/5-6/8	566 R	4.0	48	37	5	Bush +11	-
Zogby Interactive | 6/1-6/6	n/a	2.7	48.6	47.6	0.9	Bush +1	-
Rasmussen | 5/1-31	n/a	5.0	44	43	-	Bush +1	-
Zogby Interactive | 5/18-23	n/a	4.3	43.9	47.2	2.1	Kerry +3.3	-
Rasmussen | 3/23	500 L	4.5	49	42	-	Bush +7	-

Key: R = Registered Voters, L = Likely Voters, A = Adults

RCP Polling Information

Head-to-Head: Bush-Kerry
3-Way: Bush-Kerry-Nader
Bush Job Approval

State Polls
AL	LA	OH
AK	ME	OK
AZ	MD	OR
AR	MA	PA
CA	MI	RI
CO	MN	SC
CT	MS	SD
DE	MO	TN
FL	MT	TX
GA	NE	UT
HI	NV	VA
ID	NH	VT
IL	NJ	WA
IN	NM	WV
IA	NY	WI
KS	NC	WY
KY	ND

[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

Don't Panic.

In Missouri, not only will Bush carry it, but it will be by a large margin. How can I be so sure, you ask? Well, it's because it looks like Bob Holden will hold off Claire McCaskill in the primary. The Republicans could replace Matt Blunt with a dustbunny and beat Holden by 10 points. The reverse coattails of Blunt will swing another 5 points to Bush easily.

[Coop]

[POA2]

Wait a second here - While we don't have to be in panic mode (I'll agree with that) -

Your notion that GWB doesn't have to take MO to win is either just playing the devils advocate (for the purpose of doing it) 0r you are being naive -

If GWB doesn't win MO - he will not win in NOV - period. I got a dime to drop with you on that - if you want to bet.

Also coop - at what point in this election cycle will you agree that GWB "could" be in some trouble?? -

Does there ever come a point that GWB would need to change somethings or he would lose? - or do you simply continue to run the same type campaign come hell or high-water (like his father did) regardless if it bring defeat?? -

I know of no military mind that would simply keep using the same procedures for the purpose of not changing - with little regard for the outcomes -

The GOP owns the Senate, the House, more State Gov's and more State houses then the DEM's - The fact showing when we get our message out we win!! -

Yet GWB continues to find himself in a life and death struggle with a washed up, 20 year, liberal NE senator that couldn't have won any other Presidential election in American History -

There comes a point when you are tied or losing to a fool like this continually....that you say...WTF are we doing...we better find another option here -

[Corin Stormhands]

oops

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Yeah, but Zogby and Rassmussen have been at odds all along it looks like. So again, it depends on who and how you ask. Polls are guess-timates. And they are frequently manipulated.

I do not take at face value anything that comes from the liberal KCStar.

[Citizen of the Savage Nation]

Well, give em credit, they at least bothered to dig up 2 Bush supporters. In any case, love the +2 Bush lead is a 'tie' mantra, when a +2 Kerry lead is always just a 'lead'. And that guy from Cabool...that's Bush territory, but he sounds like the sort of sap that voted for Clinton twice and has a clean conscious. What a dupe.

[Coop]

If GWB doesn't win MO - he will not win in NOV - period.

Baloney. Assuming the current circumstances carried forward to November, Bush could easily lose MO, but win PA. Or lose MO and PA, but win MI, NM, WI and OR. Yes, historically MO has been a bellwether, but historically the White House loses seats in 2002... historically the total vote winner also wins the electoral college.

This gloom 'n doom, carrying on about changing courses because you perceive Bush to be in trouble, it's rather laughable. He's got a 2:1 advantage of cash-in-hand, a +14 electoral vote advantage over 2000, he has strong likeability ratings, he's running against a weak candidate with tons of skeletons, the lying charges that drove his numbers down have been proven false, and he hasn't even seriously started his campaign yet [starts after the convention].

HE'S NOT LOSING!

There. I feel much better now.

[curmudgeonII]

... because this Bush campaign is one or the worst I've seen. I'm hitting the panic button.

When in worry,
Or in doubt,
Run around,
Scream and shout

[Jokelahoma]

Absolutely no way is Missouri 39% DemonCrat, 38% Republican. Kansas City itself may work out that way. St. Louis is about 99.9999987% Democrat, .0000013% Republican (some dude named Murray, in Hazelwood, I believe), give or take a few percentage points. The vast majority of the state outside those two metropolitan areas is strongly Republican (which amounts to about 50% of the state population).

Bear in mind the source. The Star is perhaps the worst paper in the United States today, bar none. It's a far-left, race-baiting, socialist agenda-pushing waste of wood pulp staffed by editors who would be far more at home in the old Politburo than in the midwest (with the exception of McClanahan). I wouldn't be surprised if they pulled the same sort of polling "technique" that got the LA Times is trouble awhile back. After all, this is a paper that employs Jason Whitlock and Lewis Diuguid, so good journalism and fact-based reporting obviously aren't important to them.

None of this is to say Bush doesn't have a fight on his hands in Missouri. But all in all, if the Star is saying it's this close, I don't think it's panic time. If the Star said it was Kerry 68-32, then I'd figure it was really a close race. As it is, I'd bet Bush would win today by 4 or 5 points.

[AHerald]

Does there ever come a point that GWB would need to change somethings or he would lose? - or do you simply continue to run the same type campaign come hell or high-water (like his father did) regardless if it bring defeat?? -

The pompous negativist theme running through so many of your your posts on this issue is becoming tiresome. How many improbable election victories do Bush and Rove have to win until you keening doom and gloomer types realize that they know what in the hell they're doing? They have a proven track record of winning. Period. Tell us, how many winning campaigns have you run from behind the comfy anonymity of your computer keyboard?

[88keys]

There comes a point when you are tied or losing to a fool like this continually....that you say...WTF are we doing...we better find another option here -

Correct! But IMHO, this is not that point, yet...what would happen if Kerry suddenly let out out a big scream in the middle of his overly-excited acceptance speech? LOL! (well, it could happen!!)

IOW, I think it's wise to let events play out a bit for now...after all, isn't the Dim convention all about "introducing Kerry to America"? I wouldn't presume America is going to love what they see the better they get to "know" him...and why should the GOP go "negative" when there's a good chance Kerry will take care of that all by himself?

Caveat: it is important that election fraud in St. Louis is prevented, and as well that "shadow groups" like MoveOn and etc. are exposed to public scrutiny as much as possible. "Just the facts"...like, "how do you feel about a Soros-Kerry-Edwards ticket?" ;)