Posted on 08/02/2004 8:39:03 PM PDT by Indy Pendance
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-08-02-poll-cover_x.htm
(Excerpt) Read more at usatoday.com ...
Now in all fairness to Kerry, this statement isn't true.
He does has a plan, it's just that it's a secret plan and he can't tell anybody.
Dragon Lady
Um...ahem...TerAyza, that is.
That may account for the lack of bounce. The Republicans got fired up watching the Dems lie, or praise Moore, or both.
Did you see the JAX Freep report.....Liz was all excited until she realized the crowd was a "BUSH" not edwards group....even have pictures......LOL
I like this part of the article:
"After the convention, the number of Republicans who said they were more enthusiastic than usual about voting spiked by 11 percentage points, to 62%. For Democrats the increase was 5 points, to 73%). Political observers couldn't remember another time when a convention excited more loyalists in the other party than in its own."
That's hilarious. The Dems were less fired up than the Republicans after their own convention and that hasn't happened before in the whole political history of the USA!
It's unbelievable. Kerry has really got to be the worst Dem candidate in history for this to occur. Who would have guessed there would be a negative bounce? Even Matthew Dowd, the Republican Party official poll-interpreter didn't see that coming!
That the Republican convention won't cause a bounce for the President is just wishful thinking on the part of the liberal media. There will be a positive bounce... and it won't be for Kerry either! Go Bush!
Because Kerry is not as slick a con artist as Clinton was.
He was everything to every one. He can make 280 million citizens happy.
There is a stupid factor, but most Americans are smart enough to spot a phony. I predict this election will be another Reagan/Mondale election, despite what the polsters are saying now.
At least in 1996 and 2000 the Dem conventions had an air of youthful vitality. This time, the speakers and audience simply seemed outraged. Most people can stand about 2 nights of outrage, and the other two nights just alienate them.
Because he said he "would NOT privatize Social Security..."
(that's my theory and I'm stickin' to it!!!...LOL)
I think that the reason that Kerry did not get the bounce is because he is trying to be all things to all people and it isn't working, people are beginning to see through his Janus face. He is scaring them, even the anti-war crowd, with his fake militarism.
Best one I've heard today was What we heard Kerry say was "help is on the way" what he actually said was "THE help is on the way" referring to his valet/butler.
I heard he's waiting until he has a plan for every day of the week. He had 7, but then threw out Joe Wilson's suggestion and Sandy Berger's ("Send me to Iraq and I will hide the terrorists in my pants and socks.") So they're working on a new Tuesday and Sunday.
Now the dems are spinning that conventions aren't as important as before. Yeah right. If they had a huge bounce, they'd be singing the opposite tune.
Here's my take:
1. Bush has a solid base of ~40% who have already decided to vote for him.
2. Kerry has a solid base of ~35% who have already decided to vote for him.
3. Bush has soft support of ~5% - people who are inclined to vote for him, but can change their mind between now and election day.
4. Kerry currently has the support of ~10% who don't like Bush's performance and are VOTING AGAINST BUSH.
5. The remaining ~10% are undecided or will vote 3rd Party.
The Dem Convention had the biggest effect on those in category 4 - those that are not voting FOR Kerry, but AGAINST Bush. These folks are re-evaluating Bush because of Kerry's dismal performance at the convention. They feel that while Bush isn't perfect, he's better than the alternative.
Does anyone have any history regarding the bounce that a candidate gets after a convention?? I would be curious to know what that last few Presidential elections showed with regards to "the bounce".
I don't have data, I've heard from various talking heads, this was the worst convention ever.
Because this election is about the war. Most people either way have made up their minds already.
Pollster Rasmussen on O'Reilly tonight said he didn't think the election would be close. He predicted at least a five per cent difference. He said if Bush convinced voters he was doing the best he could in Iraq, if things remained fairly stable over there, then he'd probably win. I turned it off before he finished talking, so don't know if he said anything about Kerry's complete ineptness as a candidate. It's the elephant in the living room, guys. Dorky/botoxboy/nuancyboy/gigolo/absent from senate for 90 per cent of the vote/Hillary told me to get in that blue bunny suit....etc.. But I guess nobody's going to laugh him and that hamster he's running with off the political stage just yet. No reporters, that is. Too bad, because he's toast.
And yet John McLaughlin said this was an EXCELLENT convention for the Dems. Waaaay wrong.
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.