CNN/GALLUP POLL: Bush Lost Debate; Retains Double Digit Lead Over Kerry on Iraq, Terrorism

USA Today | Sept. 30, 2004 | USA Today/CNN/Gallup

[West Coast Conservative]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1111944/posts?page=1,50

Please do not post full text or even excerpts from USA TODAY. Headline & link only.

[Mo1]

Which one matters more? Stay tuned...

Kerry was outted on a number of lies during the debate .. and it's been a couple hours since the end of the debate

[goldstategop]

More truism to the effect debates never change the outcome of an election. In fact, I have a sneaking suspicion Bush's lead will grow even firmer once John F*ckin's gaffes in tonight's debate are better known. If the fat lady isn't singing, she soon will be...

[america-rules]

"So who won? Doesn't sound at all like Kerry did."

The guy behind needed a knockout like what happened when Reagan knocked out Carter and it didn't happen so Bush won.

[jackbill]

Here is the comment from a former engineering colleague, who is now a computer science professor at a local university:

A side note: My wife watched the debate. After the debate she said "I can solve the Iraq problem."

I asked her "How?" She just answered "As I said, I can solve the Iraq problem." After several go arounds, she said "That is all Kerry said, so I can say it also. He never said how, why do I need to say how."

[Hank All-American]

Even assuming Kerry "won" (which I think is actually people saying "he did better than I thought he would"), the only question that matters is what percentage of voters minds could have been changed. If we are to begin with the premise Bush was leading, let's say, 48% to 43% going in, and that those numbers are firm, with 6% undecided, and Kerry somehow manages to get two-thirds of those undecideds on election day by virtue of this debate (remember, that would translate into 66% of them thinking he not only won, but gained their vote), then Bush would still win 50-47 (with Nader taking the rest). If you do the analysis with a bigger lead for Bush, the outlook is even worse for Kerry. And this is assuming that people are going to be more swayed by a debate than by the October commercials about Kerry's flip-flops (in his own words), about him requiring a "global test" for pre-emptive action, and about his anti-war activities.

In other words, the only thing we have to worry about as Bush supporters is sending signals that we're concerned, which will only energize the opposition and allow them to try to create momentum that they really don't have.

[Antoninus]

That's pretty much my take. Bush lost on style points. However, I still don't know what Kerry's real positions are on anything--how he would handle Iran or North Korea. I caught myself zoning out during several of his longer responses.

And that's the basic problem for Kerry. The voters will choose whether to stay the course with Bush or try this unknown quantity Kerry who, despite his assurances, has no discernable true position on anything.

[lara]

Thanks! Now that's the positive attitude I like to see. And I truly believe that on substance, the President was the big winner, tonight. If I owned a car dealership, after tonights debate, I'd want Kerry, a smooth, fast talker. But to lead my country, I'd want the President. (Ok, I wouldn't hire kerry to sell my cars, either.)

[ladyinred]

I wish people had listened to Kerry's words, and not just reacted to his "style." His words should scare the heck out of any one with a brain.

[Mo1]

One thing I learned tonight is that the Kerry Freakazoids are organized with the online polls and comments on local websites

That's because the DNC sent out a mass email telling them too

I would not believe any of those online polls or the phone calls

Oh and the ones claiming to be republicans voting for Kerry .. that's a load of BS too

[kesg]

Prior to the debate, Bush was way ahead on points regarding the Iraq situation. Kerry landed alot of punches on the president, but no KO.

Taking this analogy one step further, Bush did have the one knock-down and standing 8 count -- his response to Kerry's "global test." And Kerry wobbled when Bush counterpunched Kerry's comment about more UN resolutions. I would say that Kerry looked liked a better fighter, but Bush scored more points.

[jveritas]

The fatal problem with John Kerry is that he has been already branded as a flip floper by the “majority” of voters, and they believe that he is not a leader and he is not fit to be President in this time of war. Nothing is going to change the “majority” of voters perception about John Kerry. All the new positions he took in the 90 minutes debate tonight will be viewed as another flip flop and the “majority” of voters will not believe him.

This debate will have a very little effect on the race and President Bush will be re-elected on November 2nd.

[Jay P.S.]

The press must have gotten the email from Terry at the DNC. I disagree with them on who "won." Winning is pretty subjective depending on what your goals are. If your goals were to change people's minds about your ability to lead and protect this nation, Kerry clearly lost.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/polls/2004-09-30-debate-poll.htm

Bush more likeable, more believable, trusted more to handle the responsibilities of commander-in-chief of the military, would better handle the situation in Iraq, agree more with issues felt to be important, and tell me this doesn't sum it all up:

Demonstrated he was tough enough for the job:

Bush 54%
Kerry 37%

Regardless of lefty spin....these poll numbers are not good news for the dems. Good luck spinning this one Terry.

[gop_gene]

Your vote and mine are not the ones to worry about. It's the undecided voters who may have a completely different perspective. And to be honest, I'd stop short of saying Bush looked more "composed"...he was clearly flustered at several times in the debate.

I agree with you, unfortutunately. Kerry was articulate and pointed without coming across as aggressive. And before this debate I was, and still am, a very strong Bush supporter. Kerry also didn't come across as pompous to me. While he clearly didn't come across as warm, he didn't come across as a cold fish, either.

And I agree especially about Bush's demeanor. I was quite dismayed to see how tight-jawed and grim he looked. And I at some moments his face looked like it was turning red from suppressed anger. He was like that almost from the beginning which I found startling--he was ahead in the polls, he looked instead like he was coming in with quite a hurdle to tackle. By comparison Kerry looked poised and collected.

I know Bush has been through a lot during the 3+ years and has had to make a lot of tough decisions, I just wished that he showed more spunk and optimism (like in the 2000 debates) and had brought up a lot of points he could have attacked Kerry with. As well as being able to control what appeared to be suppressed anger.

I think what happened is Bush and team got overconfident again--they thought they had it in the bag so they could afford for Bush to be too gentlemanly, and that all Bush would have to do was to refer to Kerry's "mixed signals" (code word for flip-flopper) again and again and they would win.

[des]

Bush was NOT composed...but, a little righteous indignation can be a good thing. Still, he is capable of better than he showed tonight.

[rwfromkansas]

Fair enough. We might as well call it what it was.

Thank goodness I can finally take a break from school Monday and Tuesday for a short "fall break"....the stress is just getting to me. I am getting too old for these all-night study sessions...lol.

[Time4Atlas2Shrug]

I don't think Kerry won on nimbleness - I kept drifting because he actually said nothing. There was no substance and Bush made sure when Kerry lied he was able to correct the record. He was a cool cuke.

And what was up with Kerry's hands? He hypnotizes with them and they are gross. He is just yucky.

[Jim_Curtis]

"Yellow Bracelet Syndrome": The condition of not being able to remove a symbol in fear that you will be perceived as abandoning the cause that the symbol represents.

[DarthVader]

Ed Gillespie and Karl Rove are smart enough and will put Lantern Face's words in campaign commercials and speeches. Things like global test and nuke material to Iran will sink in even with the simplest minds.

[Jeff Chandler]

I keep wanting Bush to defend himself more aggressively and knock kerry on his rear, but then I remembered that Bush never does that.

That being said, I didn't think Bush did very well in the debate.

[notfondajane]

2 words -- "Global Test"