Skip to comments.Smart People Know Kerry Has Never Led This Race
Posted on 10/16/2004 8:05:23 PM PDT by NotchJohnson
Ladies and gentlemen, the smart people in politics in this country know that the Democrats have never led the presidential race. The smart people -- the smart Democrats included in this group -- know that John Kerry has never really led this race. Not anything more than just statistically. And as such, they're pulling out all the stops. The vote fraud, the voter registration, the federal judge appointed by Clinton up in Ohio that just said: Hey, you don't have to vote in your precinct as long as you show up somewhere in your county. (story) and in Florida, they're now trying to convince the Florida Supreme Court to issue a similar ruling. And the reason for this is twofold -- and I mentioned it to you yesterday -- the reason for all this cheating and all this fraud is because Kerry doesn't have his base fired up, folks. Kerry doesn't have his base energized and he's losing some of the precious black vote. Some of the minority vote cannot be counted on either to show up or to vote for Kerry. If 50% of Kerry's base is animated by hatred for Bush, there is no deep personal connection to Kerry. This has been established by some recent polling data. I have made this point throughout this calendar year.
So everybody that has gone in the tank for Kerry is now pulling out all the stops. The latest example, Nightline last night, on ABC. In order to get the definitive story of what happened over there with John Kerry, here we are just a little over two weeks away from the campaign and we're going back to Vietnam. Now, why are we going back to Vietnam? Because the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth have had an impact, and so last night the political people at Nightline decided it's time to get the definitive truth, so what happened with Kerry's medals? Specifically his Silver Star? So what did they do? They went to Vietnam and they interviewed former -- ahem -- Viet Cong soldiers, and former villagers who were eyewitnesses to the events. They were not interested in talking to the swift boat vets, as you recall. Nightline, ABC, not interested in discussing the views of medalled American heroes who served with Kerry, who know Kerry. No. To get the definitive truth, folks... We've got two competing stories here. This is the way ABC looks at it. We've got Kerry's story, which we believe. We got the swiftvets, which we think is distortion and lying and part of the Bush campaign. So let's go really get the truth. Let's go back to where it all happened and let's go to people that were there. The Vietcong. Let's go back to Vietnam where John Kerry is actually in the North Vietnamese war museum as a hero. We have sound bites from this program. We're going to get to them in due course, sooner, rather than later. But first a little polling data. When asked who they would trust as commander in chief, people in military service and their families chose President Bush over Senator Kerry. (Laughter)
You know, I read the headline and I see some red flags. This is Will Lester. We've got two Will Lester AP stories today by the way, one of them mentioning me. This is just too good. AP, of course, the John Kerry transcript service. (Laughing) I'm sorry. I'm going to read you the lead paragraph. "When asked who they would trust as commander in chief, people in military service and their families chose President Bush over Sen. John Kerry, a decorated Vietnam veteran, by almost a 3-to-1 margin."
Why do they have to throw in that Kerry is a decorated -- I guess they're throwing it in because they want to illustrate that even though he's a Vietnam veteran and decorated, that military men and women and their families choose Bush by a 3 to 1 margin. "Bush, who served in the Texas Air National Guard, was more trusted by 69 percent while 24 percent said they trusted Kerry more, according to the National Annenberg Election Survey released Friday." That's our old buddy Adam Clymer in charge of this. Now, get this: "Those in the military and their families have a more favorable view of Bush than Americans generally, and they take a more optimistic view about Iraq, the economy and the nation's direction. A majority in the military sample, 64 percent, said the country is on the right track. Among Americans generally, 55 percent said the country is headed in the wrong direction."
Now, the question is obvious here, folks: How can these military men and women and their families possibly support Bush overwhelmingly and be optimistic about Iraq? Don't they know what's going on over there? Haven't they been watching the media? Don't they know how it sucks over there? Don't they know how we're losing over there? Don't they know how we're tearing up the country? Don't they know that it's all about Halliburton? Why, lo and behold, folks, the people there, and the people related to people there, who know what's going on, have a more favorable view of Bush than Americans in general. I wonder how that could possibly be. Americans in general aren't there. And they take a more optimistic view about Iraq than Americans. I wonder how can that be? Because they're there and most Americans are not? Somebody's going to have to get hold of these military people and tell them the truth. It's going horribly in Iraq. It's the wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time. We shouldn't be there and Christopher Reeve would be walking today if Bush were not in the White House.
Stunning poll data here, folks. Absolutely stunning. We got to get hold of this lady. This is the second Will Lester story from the Associated Press. It's about persuadable voters. We keep coming up with these new categories of voters here at the end of the race. You heard about this, Brian? "Persuadable voters watching the presidential debates tended to give higher marks to Democrat John Kerry than President Bush, but many sound reluctant to make a final decision in the presidential race."
You know, the real news about this is the focus groups that Frank Luntz and others have done that people -- we thought Kerry won. One group of 23 people thought Kerry won 17-5. There was one independent in there who thought nobody won, but 17-5. But even though the people that thought Kerry won, they're all going to vote for Bush. They think Kerry says what he says well, but they don't know if he believes it, it doesn't come across.
"'In the debates, Kerry's intelligence came through. He just seemed really thoughtful,' said Mindy Kershner of San Francisco, who is still not ready to commit. 'I probably won't decide until I actually vote'...For those persuadable voters who tuned in, the debates offered an extensive look at the two leading presidential candidates. For 83-year-old Dorothy Van Asdale, of Yuma, Ariz., the debates offered a firsthand look at a Democratic candidate she knew about mostly through the narrative of conservative radio commentator Rush Limbaugh. 'I listen to Rush Limbaugh when I'm in my car,' she said. 'We can only get one radio station really clear around here. It's so negative. I never heard a good thing about Kerry.' But when she tuned in to the presidential debates, she 'liked Kerry's presence. I liked the way he spoke.'"
So Kerry was likeable despite my negativity, and she only listens to one radio station in Yuma because that's all she can get. I guess she doesn't watch television out there. I would love to talk to her, and I'm going to dedicate the program today to Dorothy Van Asdale.
We'll dedicate the program to you Dorothy, as we attempt to change your mind once again. The question I had when I saw this piece was: If she's been listening to only me and then watched Kerry, how can she conclude anything other than what I've been saying is right? So for that reason, I wouldn't mind speaking to Ms. Van Asdale today, of Yuma, Arizona, if we can find her. I'd love to talk to her. She's 83, and I would love to find out what kind of picture she got on this program versus what she saw when she watched the debate. So maybe somebody out there can find her. I'm sure many of you out there in Yuma know Ms. Van Asdale. You might call her and let her know that we're attempting to find her, and we would love to speak with her today, and it's not about me (SEE: Lady Clarifies Her AP Quote for Rush). Don't get her all scared out there. It's not about me. I want to find out what was different about Kerry that she saw versus what she heard on this program. So see if you can find her, Mr. Snerdley. We have all kinds of directory assistance books.
All right. The Zogby poll is meandering all over the place. Now Bush has opened up a 4-point lead on John Kerry, the day after the final debate, according to the Zogby poll released today. "Bush led 48-44 in the latest 3-day tracking poll, which included one night of polling done after the debate ( transcript | video ) Wednesday in Tempe, Arizona. Bush led Kerry, a senator from Massachusetts, by only one point, 46-45 on the previous day. An improvement in Bush's showing among undecideds, and a strong response from his base Republican supporters helped fuel the president's rise. Zogby said that the difference between Kerry's 79% support among Democrats and Bush's 89% support from Republicans should also be worrisome for Kerry in such a tight race." It's what I've been telling you, Kerry's not moving his base. His base is not comprised of people who have a deep connection to him. Kerry needs to close the deal with his fellow Democrats Zogby said. This is an 8-point swing in, what, a week? In the Zogby poll.
You know, you got to be careful with this stuff and there's a website out there, RealClearPolitics.com. The browser will find it if it's a smart browser. What they do is take all of these polls, the big national polls from Gallup to Wall Street Journal, ABC News, Washington Post, CBS, New York Times, Zogby, Harris and all that, and they average them on a daily basis, and in the horse race polls, the average Bush is up 2 1/2 points over Kerry. Look it, the bottom line here, folks, is as I said at the top of the program, smart people know that Kerry has never led this race. There have been, you know, little jogs, so-called bounce-back in July. A couple of times he'd be up a point or two in some of these wacko polls. There was one poll that had him up 11 or 14, when was that? After the first debate or something? He's never really been in the lead and that is why there is this level of panic out there on the Democrats' side. Now, I have to tell you about this, too. I want to tell you about the Iowa University presidential market.
Some of you may know about this. I've been playing golf, you know, on weekends when I can find the time. I didn't get out there much during September because I was running away from hurricanes, and when I got to safe locations in the bunker, I'm on the computer watching the track of these things. But I have been out there recently, and not just on the golf course. I'm getting e-mail and phone calls from lots of my business buddies telling me about this Iowa University presidential market, futures market. My reaction is that all these -- you wouldn't believe what I get e-mails from people pointing out to me Kerry had a hangnail last Tuesday, or Teresa -- so many people grasping at anything to give them confidence and I just ignore 90% of it. I mean, I get theories, weapons of mass destruction discovered October 31st. It's the smoking gun. You know, all these e-mails from people that just want me to grab onto this and publicize this because this will get it done and I just throw them all away because it's -- you know, I'm not panicked and I'm not lacking confidence and I don't need to run and grab every little thing. But I've been hearing about this one enough that my curiosity finally got the best of me.
So I went there and I looked at it. And it's fascinating. It's two graphs, and I have sent the web link up to Koko, Jr., who is running the website today. Koko is out, it's okay, vacation day today, so Koko, Jr. is up there running the website. Koko, go ahead and post that link. It's two graphs. They are fully explainable. It's very difficult for me to describe. Well, I can describe it, but I can't describe the graphs for you nearly as well as you can see them yourself. What the deal is, the Iowa University presidential market is basically -- what do you call this? They've for people who want bet on the race.
For people who want to bet on the race in a certain way, this is a place that gives an indication of how you should go. You look on the left side of both these graphs is the price column on the left side of the graph. This would be the left vertical side, and the price is anywhere from 76 cents down to 18 cents, whatever, depending on where their ranges have fallen, and that is the price you pay to win a buck. There are two different categories in the first graph. There are four categories in the lower graph that tabulate Bush or Kerry winning in a majority, Bush or Kerry winning less than 52%. And people have been betting. People have been wagering and the wagers force the movement of the graph on a daily basis, and you can clearly see that there was a huge Bush bounce back in October, early October that has closed somewhat but it's starting to widen again now.
Now, this is not driven by polls. Well, I guess some of it is driven by polls, but it's driven by people, and I don't know how many. But it is driven by people who are making these small little wagers. By the way, just to be clear, there's no place on this link that I'm putting up that you can bet or wager or any of that. So we're not promoting anything. I just want you to see this because somebody's making this happen. It's not exorbitant. It's win a dollar, you bet 56 cents or whatever the odds are. And you can see when you look at both these graphs, both these charts, that Kerry's never been in the lead, a significant lead for any length of time.
This is a brief bubble back in July, which has to be the post-convention bounce that Kerry's slightly up. So, Koko, go ahead and put that up, and when you look at that, it's just another interesting way to track the way people are thinking about this. People are putting money behind it. You have to say the polls are relevant because the people who are making these graphs move one direction or another have to be getting their information from someplace in order to play their hunches but aside from that, it's fascinating. And they move it every day. It has movement to it every day. Once you have the link, you just have to refresh it, and update it. Once again, it's actually not betting in a sense. What you do is you're buying stock. You know, one dollar stock would cost you some odd cents, based on the odds here. Go check it out. Iowa University presidential market.
You're stealing my Rush Limbaugh thunder. :)
Not only do we have to hope Bush wins, but we have to hope for a double-digit win so that we don't wind up with lawsuits from the Demoncrats.
So how exactly does a Federal judge get to trump the opinion of the State(s), which are duly authorized to conduct a federal election? Is this kinda like the State Department inviting the UN as observers (to elections administered by law by the States)? This Federal judge has an opinion and thinks higjly of him(/her)self. Anyone care?
"'In the debates, Kerry's intelligence came through. He just seemed really thoughtful,' said Mindy Kershner of San Francisco, who is still not ready to commit. 'I probably won't decide until I actually vote'..."
No, Mindy Kershner, celebrated, attention-seeking "undecided voter" of San Francisco (yeah, right), here's where YOUR intelligence comes through, and I'm ready to commit: You are an idiot.
This is just a personal opinion, mind you, but I think that anyone who is "undecided" at this point should just stay home on Election Day.
If you couldn't be bothered to get informed until now, it probably isn't very important to you who is president.
This isn't choosing a pair of shoes for crying out loud!
Agreed. If you're "undecided" today, you're lifeform is classified as vegatative.
Bedwetters . . . I don't see that so often. Is it in common use? A good friend, a reasonable moderate I like to call him, uses the term, too.
She voted for Clinton, twice, and AlGore.
I don't buy her "undecided" act.
We shall hope the undecideds are all lazy enough to do just that, as we all know whom they'll vote for if someone does rouse them out of bed in time to make it to the polls.
(Try St. Louis; I hear they stay open late! Maybe even 24 hours, like Micky D's!)
Think "gay marriage"! These judges who make it up as they go along need to be recalled. I am of the opinion that judges should all be elected so that We The People can get them fired when they pull stunts like they have been!
I absolutely agree with you. Judges should be elected and they should debate as well, for the benefit of the voters.
Gotta admit there was something to declaring yourself "undecided". It got some of them a free seat at the debate!
I think we should refer to these people as "uninformed voters" and not "undecided".
Yes, that way we can weed out the nut-jobs that are so liberal that they didn't meet a give-away or perverted agenda they didn't like!
I don't believe there are many undecideds at all.
There are people who just don't want to say ....etc.
But, they are decided.
I think people are buying in to the media spin a bit too much. Kerry is not going to win.
Bush will win by a wide margin.
It won't be a surprise to many people...except the media.
I PRAY that you are right!!! BUSH RULES!
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.