Posted on 11/01/2004 4:47:13 AM PST by Momaw Nadon
These college students with cell phones are the same people we were calling Deaniacs last year. Remember how 10's of thousands of them were going to show up at evey primary and Dean was going to sweep to victory? We'll see tomorrow, but I expect Bush to win in Ohio.
In the 60's, the vast majority of college students were under 21. the leal voting age at that time.
"college students"
Most college students, or anyone in this age group, will not stand in line to do anything unless it's to get free concert tickets. Some of them wouldn't even do that. Believe me, if they have to go to ANY effort, they won't vote.
Incredible so many people are putting money on The Fraud. Sheesh!
Ohio is a must-win. Look for major Dem fraud there.
ORegon should be up at 40%. HEck W lost it bu less than 1% in 2000.....what's changed? Could be the surprise of the night.
College student turnout has always been notoriously poor. Granted, that could change at any time but I would bet that "Hip Hop Nation" will decide to sleep in tomorrow, have a few brewskis, smoke a couple of pipes and do its voting on Wednesday.
Peesh, I knew Bush won when I saw the Weekly Reader results. That's the best poll in the country and anyone that doesn't take it seriously is deluded.
leal = legal
Agreed that the historical college voting turnout has been disgraceful (good news for the GOP, at least)but, with the election appearing winnable for the lefties by mere virtue of showing up to vote, do you think the little dears won't cease their narcissm long enough to pull a couple of levers? Do you think the first time voters residing in these left wing think tanks don't remember 2000 and the impact of a few votes here and there? Anybody that thinks this election is a done deal at this point should think again...sure Kerry has no margin for error, but Ohio is quite winnable for him, and if he winds Ohio, we will be referring to President elect Kerry on Wednesday of this week...then again, it's quite winnable for Bush as well...sorry for the equivocation, but this thing is up for grabs, in a big way...
I am coming to work tomorrow - but I have taken Wed. and the rest of the week off as "vacation time" - I could have probably taken the rest of the week off as "sick time" since I have plenty of sick symptoms. I need a Valium or something
I may have missed this before, but have you commented on how accurate these guys are with reguards to the last election? Were they around for 2000? If so, did they get that right too?
True, but while lowering the voting age makes the pool larger, it doesn't increase their general propensity to vote.
After Bruce Springsteen made his appearance with Kerry in front of 80k people, a reporter asked a couple of the girls in the audience about voting Kerry. They looked at each other an broke out into laughter.
A mob scene with music is cool, but I don't see it translating into going down to the poll, standing in line, and getting the vote in the box. Maybe I'm just cynical.
dung.
Interesting that Kerry is given a 1.7% chance in Massachusetts.
The problem with this model is that it only allows democrats to vote one time. It ignores the rampant vote fraud that is happening. Please note that I wrote IS happening, rather than will happen; they got an early start this election.
Mark A Sity
This election will be close in key areas like Ohio and there's no excuse for complacency surely. That said, my experience with narcissistic lefties has been that nothing short of onest work for a long time is strong enough to break it. They believe so thoroughly in the principle of Free Stuff that even the tiny effort involved in getting off the couch, putting down the bong, going down to the poll, standing in line and pulling the lever is a violation of the Purity of the Free Stuff Idea. They have no more memory of the 2000 election than my dog has. That said, since Republicans doubt the Free Stuff notion, we must make a concerted effort to turn out every Republican vote.
You know, I'm on the ground here in what some have called the battleground region of a battleground state (central OH, Franklin Co.). I have seen tremendous numbers of Kerry-Edwards ads running on local cable to essentially none for Bush-Cheney. There are numerous yard signs for Kerry in places (like my neighborhood) where you would expect Republican strength, middle class, persons of no-color. I have read stories where the 'rats have registered something like 100,000 more new voters than Republicans. Given that Bush's margin here in 2000 was just a little over that, coupled with anxiety over the 200,000+ jobs lost here in the last four years, and you're looking at a state ripe for picking by the 'Rats.
Other FReepers in different areas of the state have noted on these threads that they have seen Bush strength elsewhere, and I do not doubt that this is true. Bush is strong in the southern part of the state, the Cincinnati area, but that is typically true for Republican candidates. I have heard that the Dayton suburbs have also indicated some measure of support for Bush-Cheney. But central OH looks very, very close, with the edge to Kerry at this point, I'm sorry to say.
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.