Again, with all due respect, this poll is garbage. Republicans have been ridiculously oversampled. Let us wait for polls from organizations with more credibility than Newsweak.
I'm with you, nwrep ...
i'm with you. when the LA Times which over samples the RATS has numbers like these then I'll think a reagan vote is on teh train tracks and that mr carter and mr mondale will be happy cause they will not have worst record.
I'm not arguing here but what is you theory as to why Newsweek would do this. It is a liberal rag or at least it was, when I canceled my subscription years ago.
maybe too many people are afraid to identify themselves as democrats now??
Somebody's talkin' shit here. These two states are the core of northeast socialism
The majority of voters in these two states believe that higher taxes are the cure-all from hang-nails to world peace!
I agree, however, look at the independents in the poll. Bush leads them by 5% now. He's never done that before.
Kerry has a reputation for fighting back; he's had come-from-behind victories before after being written off as defeated. Albeit, this was in Massachusetts. But I expect Kerry to unleash a withering negative campaign against Bush: highlighting claimed Bush flip-flops, Bush failure to keep promises, alleged Bush lies. You can do a lot with $100 million.
You mean they finally ask Republicansfor a change.
You may be right. But how do you know that we may be seeing another significance in this poll: that more respondents are identifying themselves as GOP. Could that be the case?
>>Republicans have been ridiculously oversampled.
You might be right but if the Democrats are as demoralized on election day as they are today, these proportions might be pretty predictive. If Bush is clearly ahead on election day, I expect a very low Democrat turnout. Low enough in fact to seriously threaten a couple of otherwise safe Democrat Senate seats (such as Murray in Washington and Reid in Nevada).
True, but Bush may be doing very very well in California at this point. Do I want him to spend any money there? No. But he's probably tied there currently, though Kerry will pull back into the lead as the bounce subsides a bit.
But now that Bush has gotten a sizeable convention bounce, the pollsters are no longer able to maintain the "horse race" lie. They must now save face by making the "Bush Bounce" seem even bigger than it really is so that they can release the real numbers under some sort of cover (must have been that HUGE convention bounce).
IMHO, Bush was up 5-7 point all along. He got maybe a five point bounce out of this convention. But it's going to seem much bigger than that on account of the fact that we are seeing real numbers for a change.
Kerry is going to be a big loser this November. He's got nothing. He's an awful, awful candidate. Not even likeable in his own party. And his running mate is such a lightweight that he makes Dan Quayle seem like Dick Cheney by comparison.
Kerry came out of his convention with a negative bounce. The pollsters cooked the numbers to make it seem like he at least held his ground, hoping that Bush's convention would be a dud as well. But the gamble didn't pay off. Americans have been breaking for a Bush in a major ways since the Democratic convention in July. The Lamestream Media has been holding back the surge ever since to the best of their ability. But the dam has burst. They can no longer contain the surge that Bush has been getting SINCE LATE JULY.
The floodgates have been opened. A Bush double-digit lead is the least of the Democratic Party's problems right now. Not only are they saddled with the worst presidential candidate since George McGovern, but their very future is at stake. They are now seen as the party of Michael Moore and other anti-American fruitcakes. Normal Americans who would be disposed to vote Democratic can no longer associate themselves with that kind of scum. What we are seeing here isn't "Bush Democrats" but Democrats fleeing the party.
The Democratic Party has been taken over by Marxists and commies and other anti-American types. Even lunch-pail union workers who have voted Democrat all their lives do not want to be in the same camp as Michael Moore, who in his disgusting film, portrayed Saddam Hussein's Iraq as an "oasis of paradise" in a manner very similar to the Nazi propaganda films of the 1930s in which Adolph Hitler was shown handing out flowers to little girls.
If the Democratic Party does not act to root this kind of scum out of their party, then this is going to be a "turn out the lights" election for them.
During the past week, the American people have seen that all the decent politicians are in the Republican camp. Rudolph Guiliani, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Zell Miller (a Democrat!), Mitt Romney, etc., etc. Even John McCain, a liberal darling, spoke for the Republicans and expressed his disgust with that "disingenous filmaker" who has now come to symbolize all that is wrong and wretched with the Democratic Party.
Now when the average American thinks of the Republican Party, they think of Guiliani, Zell Miller and Schwarzenegger. When they think of the Democratic Party, they now think of Michael Moore, Hillary Clinton and the pathetic John Kerry.
If we don't have a GOP landslide of epic proportions this November, I will be shocked.
Is it possible that more people responding to the poll said they were Republican because they were more likely to vote for Bush? In other words, as Bush's actual numbers go up, wouldn't you expect more people to say that they are Republican when being polled?
Bush/Cheney - 50%
Skerry/BreckGirlSilkPony - 43%
Still a nice bump, but not the amount being reported by Newsweek.