Posted on 09/24/2004 7:28:05 AM PDT by ironmike4242
Momentum = Mass X Velocity.
John F'n K is a light weight ,...thus Mass = Zero
Velocity is a has components of magnitude and DIRECTION.
Since J F'nK has an infinite number of directions, his resultant velocity = Zero.
Thus J F'n "flip-flop Kerry has ZERO momentum
J F'n K trying to generate some mystical momentum....but without success
This is only true if Kerry wins all of the Gore states. Right now, he is losing Wisconsin (10 EV), Iowa (7 EV), and arguably New Mexico (5 EV) and Minnesota (10 EV). The only state where Bush won in 2000 that could be considered in real danger right now is Maine (4 EV). In Ohio, Bush is up by 6; in Florida, Bush up by 6; Kerry has stopped competing in MO, AR, LA, and AZ.
A friend in California pointed out to me that in 2000, had California's votes been counted similarly to the Electoral College (by counties for example), Bush would've been a BIG victor. Just like in Arnold's win, the only places electing Dems are LA, SF, SD. The important, value-driven rural people, the backbone and guts of this nation, are securely Bushies.
The latest polling does show Kerry leading PA.
Fox: Kerry up by 3
AMR and Mason-Dixon: Kerry up by 1
All three are LV polls
The race is not frozen, Kerry is losing ground on a daily basis. He just gave up on 3 more states this week.
You're assuming that Kerry can hold all of the states Gore carried in 2000. There's no reason to believe he will.
The Clinton/Gore years intruded on what had been a strong period of dominance for the GOP in presidential elections. The DemocRATs collapsed as a presidential party in the late 1960's. That was when southern conservatives and nothern blue collar voters left the party because it was taken over by radical leftists. Republicans won five of the six presidential elections from 1968 thru 1988. Four of those were by margins ranging from very comfortable to landslide proportions. The only close one (1968) was because George Wallace siphoned off a lot of conservative votes from Nixon. The only DemocRAT win during this span was Jimmy Carter's narrow win in 1976, when Carter ran as a conservative and conned a lot of southerners and blue collar types into voting for him.
Then came 1992. The first President Bush alienated his base by raising taxes. Ross Perot came along, siphoning off GOP votes. The Cold War had ended, ironically a GOP success which hurt them because defense issues were no longer seen as crucial by voters. And the 'Rats nominated Bill Clinton, a highly skilled con man who could pose as being a "new kind of Democrat" (i.e., supposedly more conservative) while biting his lip and feeling our pain.
Those factors allowed Clinton to win with a mere 43% of the vote. He built that up to about 49% for 1996 by wooing the proverbial soccer moms. These were suburban women who know little about issues but respond to lip biting, bedroom eyes, talk of "compassion", etc. With no visible imminent national security threat, Clinton built enough of a base to survive by "feeling our pain" and wooing airheaded women voters. Gore tapped into the same phenomenon in 2000 with his nationally televised "alpha male" kiss of Tipper, and he nearly won.
But this is 2004. We face an imminent and deadly threat. Bush has four years of service under his belt, and a good approval rating. Soccer moms are becoming security moms. Kerry is a fraud like Clinton, but without the charisma. Put the two of them in the same county selling snake oil and Clinton would get rich, while Kerry would go bankrupt.
Kerry won't do as well as Gore. He might do as well as Dukakis. There's a chance he'll crash badly like Mondale or McGovern.
If Kerry is having to fight for Pennsylvania, there's no way he'll carry Ohio or Florida. He's in deep trouble.
Gore won Maine, not Bush. Perhaps you are thinking of NH?
I always knew they were "odd"! LOL. It is good to know they aren't the majority there. Lots of good people in Odessa/Midland. Thanks for the information.
This is a predictable effort which we spoted on FR long before the bounce.
Candidate School 101 is ALWAYS CLAIM THE MOMENTUM in YOUR direction.
It is a propaganda tool.
If kerry is abandoning states, then claim the race is tighening in kerry favor.
IT is a tool nothing more.
I don't buy it. People are attracted to winners, not losers. 25-points-behind thinking only gets people to believe that their efforts are futile.
Whoops! You're right! Sorry....
Unfortunately for Kerry there are no more weeks leading up to the debates. The first one is six days away, and some analysts contend that it's the only one that matters since it's the only one didicated to foreign policy. If Kerry fails to hit a home run in the first debate, the other two might not matter.
He has also pulled ads in Ohio, and if there was ever an overt sign early on that the game plan is flailing, it's pulling money from a critical swing state. I do not know if he plans to bring in big money at the end, but word was that ALL ad plans have been cancelled.
So sad, Kerry has strategy while his opponent has strategery!
Agree. There is also another factor: Nader's votes have already been figured in with Kerry's. If Kerry is perceived at all as a loser (not hard), I think you'll see Nader's vote expand slightly in some of these states.
I keep forgetting how close the first debate is.
Just heard on radio, that although Kerry has pulled ads in Missouri, the 527s have stepped in. Not sure about Ohio. Both critical states. How many states can he write off? There were only 50, last I checked...Maybe he is counting France? Germany?
bump
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.