Posted on 09/26/2004 9:33:30 AM PDT by Owen
"With that said, I still think we are going to see the largest voter turnout in Presidential History (% wise)."
are you sure you want to stand by that statement? Do you know how high turnout was prior to the 1960s? It wasnt unusual for 70% even 80% turnout in the 19th century.
In 1960 turrnout was over 60%, no election since then has had turnout anywhere near that high. Turnout might bump up 1-3 points versus 2000, but not much more.
Dont get caught up in the hype. I wouldnt necessaily pay attention to the NYT story on massive new DEM voters. More likely a story to bolster the morale of the left.
"They all are seeing White House staff jobs on their resumes and a lifetime of lucrative lobby work. They Won't Give Up. They have too much to gain."
you think this is the left's motivating factor?????
youre dangersouly close to completely discrediting yourself here.
I am sure this person is a troll.
I am sure this person is a troll.
Hey I believe you Mr. Rasmussen, but I have one question:
Would you please show me a single state in a single continuing poll that shows frenchie gaining? Oh you can't well what do you think of that?
There's something else unfolding out there, folks. This issue of the Dems outregistering the GOP in battleground states.
The question is, are the pollsters using a polling universe of registration lists already on file or are they calling in a truly random fashion and asking if the person is registered.
If it is the latter, then this alleged outregistering thing would be seen. If it is the former, then we could be in trouble because these polling leads might not catch these new registered voters.
We need to respond to this threat. Please, Please, call the campaign and volunteer to register voters in GOP districts of battlegrounds.
I don't think so. Check "In Forum"
"Don't compare Rasmussen with polls that are a week old. A week is a lifetime. Rasmussen is daily. Time showed some closure in the gap too. The closure is real. They have out-registered us. We have about a week to make that up, and thereafter we have to do a better job of GOTV.
Do not think this is over. It's not. The opposition is intent. Think about what they are fighting for. They all are seeing White House staff jobs on their resumes and a lifetime of lucrative lobby work. They Won't Give Up. They have too much to gain."
No one is stating that they will 'give up'
However I am not going to give credit to a poll that says Bush is even with Kerry when the state polls show otherwise.
Which of Bush's States are in danger of falling to Kerry?
Registration is not the issue-voting is.
Polls in Ohio show double digit leads
Polls in Florida about 6-9 points
Now, all I've seen lately is Kerry campaign conceding on States like VA, Ark, Tenn, and a few more. (what candidate has ever won the presidency without winning a southern state (beside Lincoln?)
I've seen Bush making headway in Kerry states of NJ, WI, Maryland (!)
There is danger in overconfidence and there is danger in defeatism also.
You can underestimate your foe and you can overestimate him also, both can lead to defeat.
One further point, you might have missed the article that stated that for the first time Republicans outnumber Democrats in registration.
Excellent reply.
Good catch - I should have said highest turnout in a "modern-day" Presidential race -
I do believe turnout will be up much more than only 3% off of 2000 -
As for not reading too much into the NYT story showing more "new" Democrats registered in OH and FL - This is one of those cases were the hype doesn't mean a thing - The fact that the Democrats did a better job at getting more "new" Democrats registered then we were able to get "new" Republicans registered makes me feel a little uneasy -
Not panic mode or anywhere near that - I just don't like the fact that they do have a ground game up and running on the same level as we do. Much of the Democrats 527's monies were going to these type efforts outside of the "ads" -
i dont think turnout will be much higher than in 2000, unless it is on teh GOP side. The DEMs gave it al lthey had in 2000.
How do you know the NYT story is even true?
Als othese results woudl be showing up in national polling. I was polled and the argument that polls arent capturing potential new voters is nonesense.
Look If Bush truly has a 53% approval rating (approval ratings poll adults) he will win. No President ever lost wit ha 50% plus approval.
Actually the DEMS DONT have a ground game up. There is virtually no grass roots organization for Kerry in the states you mentioned.
Agree if G.W. Bush approval rating remains above 52% history will suggest he will win - Completely agree with this -
However, your notion that the Kerry camp doesn't have a ground game up and running in OH and FL is simply not being honest - (the fact is both those States were very close in 2000 and thus the DNC did a decent job then) -
The Dem's have been targeting FL since 2000 and by every measure they have at least increased their efforts in FL since 2000 (that is not to say it will move FL to Kerry) -
Also, voter registration numbers have shown an increase in minority areas within OH - (I think up like 250% over 2000) - So if these numbers jumped to "new" Democrats being registered at higher rates like these WITHOUT a Kerry/DNC ground game......well that would suggest worse news -
In that it would be suggesting minority voters are "on their own" making sure they are registered and therefore would obviously be more willing to make sure they vote in November -
Polls are fine but to suggest they pick up "swells of new voters" is not exactly true - IE "likely voters" will not show an uptick in "new voters" at all - in Likely voter polls these "new voters" aren't even counted (which would mean the registered voter polls are more meaningful) -
This of course is what the Kerry team keeps trying to sell - That the LV polls are picking up the "new registered" voters -
My point is, this race is a long way from being over - G.W. Bush is sitting in decent shape right now - but we need a very big effort to get "new republicans" registered in the next 7 days before that registration date expires in many key States.
"However, your notion that the Kerry camp doesn't have a ground game up and running in OH and FL is simply not being honest - (the fact is both those States were very close in 2000 and thus the DNC did a decent job then)"
Not only is it honest, it is the truth. There is no grassroots effort the DEMs have in OH that compares in any way shape or form the the GOP.
As for new voter registration efforst, sure they mentio 250% increase over 2000, but how many did they register in 2000? I would like an absolute number as well.
As for your description of likely voter polls not picking up news voters that is absolutely untrue. When i was polled they asked me if I was registered and then gave me a choice of the likelihood of my voting in this election. They never asked me if I voted in 2002 or 2000.
Youve bought into the Michael Moore propaganda that there is an invisible army of new voters that will vote for Kerry and surprise and shock the nation on Nov 2nd. BULL.
Most LV polls are done (Gallup, SUSA, Zogby, IBD) all ask about your past Presidential elections and "have you voted" and if so "for whom" -
LV polls are determined by the "big guys" by much more than "do you consider yourself likely to vote" - (please) How skewed would that be, half the people who don't vote will insist to you two days before the election how "I'm going to vote this year" but then on election day get to busy.
LV polls are usually based somewhat off of past voting behavior -
The minority vote in 2000 in OH was somewhere between 8 and 11% (I think) - The fact is in 2000 G.W. Bush won OH by apprx. 3% -
Thus if there is a larger voter turnout of "newly registered" voters than in years past this will have an impact - To ignore this would be foolish (and I am certain Karl Rove isn't ignoring it) -
That was the hole purpose of the Rove plan to get "new suburb" voters registered in OH,PA,WI,MI (the Midwest)-
Lastly I never said the Democrats grassroots movement was up to speed with the GOP in OH - I said their grassroots movement is better this year than in 2000 (and in 2000 we won OH by 3%) -
And if they have managed to out register us with "new" voters this is something we need to be aware of and act on -
Since Kerry's grassroots organization is pratically non-existant in OH, it seems odd that it is better than in 2000. Youre worrying yourself sick.
Look if Kerry wins, he wins. I am not going to worry about it.
At some point a DEM is going to win and since the DEMS are now a party that is openly hostile to the USA and oppose ideals such as American exceptionalism, I do not think the USA as we know it today has much time left regardless.
it is only a matter of time until the DEMs assume the postion of the Liberals in Canada. They never lose regardless of their corruption or incompetence.
Perhaps you are right - I'm worrying over nothing - I just want us (the GOP) to have all our bases covered.
G.W. Bush is a great man and the right man to lead America.
We are going to win this Nov.
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.