Skip to comments.
Nearly half of Americans wouldn't vote for Bush again
AFP ^
| 08-23-03
Posted on 08/23/2003 4:31:16 PM PDT by Brian S
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 181 next last
To: B Knotts
A serious, massive crackdown on illegal immigration could boost his numbers quickly. I agree. In fact the Immigration issue is Bush's only ace-in-the-hole; but I'm afraid he won't play it, allowing that issue to default to the Democrat Candidate (Hillary! God forbid). In my nightmares I can hear that witch next October screaming: "Elect me ... I'll close those borders!"(Of course she won't, but her workers will cheer loudly, and the American voters will scream: "YES!")
61
posted on
08/23/2003 5:18:28 PM PDT
by
bimbo
To: Burkeman1
As an aside. Does anyone else think that the Perot put up was a Clinton black bag operation both times? The guy had no clear platform other than "reform" and wasn't his company rewarded both times with nice government contracts by Clinton?I don't know about the contracts, but I do know Perot had (still does, I'm sure) a gigantic ego and a major league hatred for Bush 41. Combine it with the fact that the American voting Zeitgeist in 1992 was little more than "throw the bums out!", and I think you've got pretty decent evidence that Perot just saw an opportunity to screw with an enemy, have a lot of fun, and make himself famous, so he ran with it.
62
posted on
08/23/2003 5:19:25 PM PDT
by
Timesink
To: Brian S
You were expecting honesty from Newsweek ..??
These people LOVE Hitlery - and I believe they will do ANYTHING to help her.
What they don't realize is that the lower they try to force the numbers the LARGER GROWS THE FORCE TO STOP THEM. Besides, this 49 is more than 10 points lower than most of the other polls, including USAToday/CNN's which is at 61.
63
posted on
08/23/2003 5:20:33 PM PDT
by
CyberAnt
( America - "The Greatest Nation on the Face of the Earth")
To: thinktwice
Two mispellings of the same word tells me we have a suspect foreign -- and biased -- source.AFP is Agence France-Presse, the French news agency.
64
posted on
08/23/2003 5:22:13 PM PDT
by
Timesink
To: Brian S
As it applies to the "War on Terror".................
"Meanwhile, 69 percent are now convinced the United States will become bogged down in Iraq, without achieving ostensible goals in getting the country back on its feet."
What is our exit strategy?
What are our "goals" in this war?
I think President Bush could be a stone-cold cinch if the objectives of the "war" could be quantified.
65
posted on
08/23/2003 5:24:32 PM PDT
by
WhiteGuy
(It's now the Al Davis GOP...........................Just Win Baby !!!)
To: Apple Pan Dowdy
Well., where are the oil profits? When the war looked inevitable last March, I bought shares in Halliburton ... Keep looking at Halliburton's bottom line. The profits will show up there long before the Exxons, Shells, and Texacos see their profits improved by Iraq. Unfortunately, American citizens won't see a dime returned on their "investment" in Iraq.
66
posted on
08/23/2003 5:25:08 PM PDT
by
bimbo
To: Brian S
Typical liberal approach:
1. Come up with a lie, fabrication, exageration, etc.
2. Put it out in the media.
3. Have the talking heads repeat it over and over and over........
4. The lie takes on a life of it's own.
5. See if the results hurt the object of their scheme.
Of course, liberals believe this approach always works because they deeply believe that the vast majority of Americans are STUPID, ILLITERATE, UN-EDUCATED BAFFOONS.
Well, probably true for a small percentage :)
To: Burkeman1
As an aside. Does anyone else think that the Perot put up was a Clinton black bag operation both times? Uh yeh! It was reported Perot met with Clinton in private meetings twice during the campain! I think it was in NM?
68
posted on
08/23/2003 5:25:42 PM PDT
by
concerned about politics
(Lucifer lefties are still stuck at the bottom of Maslow's Hierarchy)
To: Brian S
Saying you won't vote for Bush in the next election is different than saying you would vote for Howard Dean (or whomever) over Bush. These polls mean nothing and I'm happy we have a President who does what's right. He could have sat on his sky-high numbers after 9/11 and coasted to re-election, but he chose to do what was needed in Iraq which dropped his poll numbers rapidly.
69
posted on
08/23/2003 5:26:15 PM PDT
by
Texas_Dawg
(I will not rest until every "little man" is destroyed.)
To: Timesink
"There are two very big differences between Bushes 41 and 43..."
And Don't forget Ross Perot, if it wasn't for Perot, Clinton would never have been elected. He took something like 15-19%, did he not? I believe a substantial portion of Perot's support would have gone to Bush in a two way race.
To: technomage
3. Have the talking heads repeat it over and over and over........ You can almost bet this poll will be cited by Russert on Meet the Press tomorrow as gospel.
71
posted on
08/23/2003 5:26:54 PM PDT
by
Brian S
To: Burkeman1
The Ten Commandments guy. Speculation is that Howard Phillips is courting him to be the Constitution Party standard bearer. In a close race he may pull a percentage point or two from Bush.
72
posted on
08/23/2003 5:26:55 PM PDT
by
kms61
To: Brian S
The nine Democratic candidates for president were in Philadelphia recently. A reporter asked Governor Rendell who would win if the election was held today. Rendell, without any hesitation, said Bush would win.
73
posted on
08/23/2003 5:27:11 PM PDT
by
TracyPA
To: B Knotts
Border security now Bush!
To: MNLDS
I agree with you. Presidents always poll poorly in August, anyway. It's the Dog Days, and no one, no one is paying attention to the next election.
But yours truly is, and he clicked on the Drudge article that led to the Newsweek story. Scrolled to the bottom of the page. The poll was of human beings over 18. I don't event think it was of "registered voters", much less likelies.
That's it. That's like taking a poll of fire hydrants and tombstones.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
75
posted on
08/23/2003 5:29:13 PM PDT
by
section9
(To read my blog, click on the Major!)
To: MNLDS
I have consistently expected Dubya to win with 300-325 electoral votes, though not much more since large pockets are just out of reach (NY, Cali-Wash-Oregon, CT, Mass, IL)which means it will be over before the left coast chimes in (and since they will all go for the dem, it won't matter).
76
posted on
08/23/2003 5:29:23 PM PDT
by
HitmanLV
(I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.)
To: technomage
Of course, liberals believe this approach always works because they deeply believe that the vast majority of Americans are STUPID, ILLITERATE, UN-EDUCATED BAFFOONS. Well, probably true for a small percentage :)
We know the exact number and percentage. 50,994,086 (48.4%)
See post #51
77
posted on
08/23/2003 5:29:24 PM PDT
by
concerned about politics
(Lucifer lefties are still stuck at the bottom of Maslow's Hierarchy)
To: Brian S
FLASH: Over 75% of Americans never voted for Clinton, and he lived in the White House for 8 years, I'm sorry to say.
To: Joe Hadenuf
Border security now Bush! And replace Karl Rove with Joe Hadenuf. (Because he's a political mastermind, you know.)
79
posted on
08/23/2003 5:30:23 PM PDT
by
Texas_Dawg
(I will not rest until every "little man" is destroyed.)
To: Brian S
This is a Newsweek Poll. It is therefore obvious that is therefore constructed to place a doubt into the public discourse.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 181 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson