Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Wash. Post 9/6 Poll: Bush 69% Approval, GOP Leads Dems in Generic 49% to 41%
The Washington Post ^ | 9/8/02 | Richard Morin

Posted on 09/08/2002 12:47:38 AM PDT by tellw

Edited on 09/08/2002 1:10:28 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]

If the election for the U.S. House of Representatives were being held today, would you vote for (the Democratic candidate) or (the Republican candidate) in your congressional district? (IF OTHER, NEITHER, DK, REF) Would you lean toward the (Democratic candidate) or toward the (Republican candidate)?

NET LEANED VOTE

Republican: 49%
Democrat: 41%
Other: 1%
Neither: 2%
Will not vote: 1%
No Opinion: 5%

Click here for the full polling data.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bush; polls
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-58 next last
To: tellw
This poll indicates a blowout in Nov in favor of the Repubs. However, I'll wait till I see add'l polls that confirm it - this is so strong I want to see other polls before I buy into the msg here.

Generally polls showing a 50 50 split produce a 4 to 6% republican victory on election day. If this is true - this could remove the McGovern Wing of the Democratic Party from power permanently.

21 posted on 09/08/2002 11:32:33 AM PDT by joeyman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Green Knight
I have seen a subtle, but continuing shift in GOP statergery (g) since Marc Racicot took over the helm. I hope they continue to NOT choke. So far...it's going well.

Example: I do NOT think it accidental that during the joint GWB/BLAIR press conference yesterday, that GWB addressed the fact that Daschle/Gephardt et al. were in favor of taking out Saddam in 1998. In fact, they were QUITE vocal about their views.

22 posted on 09/08/2002 11:43:46 AM PDT by justshe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: tellw
Why was the LA Times Generic poll touted on CNN showing the Rats up 10%?
23 posted on 09/08/2002 12:09:48 PM PDT by Mike Darancette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mike Darancette
Yaaahooo!!! Glory to God!
24 posted on 09/08/2002 1:53:42 PM PDT by joyful1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: JameRetief
Thank you for posting. This is very good news indeed. My suggestion to all: Do your Christmas shopping before September 30, so that the economic numbers show up in October before the mid-term elections.
25 posted on 09/08/2002 1:57:41 PM PDT by mwl1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: joeyman
I think that Bush has weathered the storm, and that despite ENRON, a slow economy, PLO/Israel, the "White-House-Knew," and all the other crap the Demon crats have thrown at Bush for six straight months, him being at over 60% is incredible. An Iraq invastion or a slight uptick in the stock market and these slimeballs are going to be down for a looonnnnng time.
26 posted on 09/08/2002 2:16:40 PM PDT by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Mike Darancette
I looked on Pollingreport.com and saw that the LA times latest poll on the congressional matchup was taken August 22-25. It showed Dems 47%, GOP 39%. But I think that was taken when Republicans were on vacation (and on a WEEKEND no less). This Washington Post poll was taken mid-week (Sept. 3-6) which I am told is more accurate if you're just going to take a poll of adults/registered voters.
27 posted on 09/08/2002 2:37:58 PM PDT by tellw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: joeyman
"Generally polls showing a 50 50 split produce a 4 to 6% republican victory on election day. If this is true - this could remove the McGovern Wing of the Democratic Party from power permanently."

To the contrary. Even as it weakened the Democrats, it would tend to even further radicalize the party.

Reason being, under this scenario, the Democrats would lose seats in so-called swing districts -- where candidates are, by definition, more moderated. The more radical socialist and racist Democrats are harbored in safe districts -- where they can afford to be radical.

Thus, a serious beating at the polls is likely to further radicalize the Democrat party. Which would tend to pull them into ever more marginal positions, eventually reducing the Democrats to a radical rump. And a merger with Nader's Greens...

28 posted on 09/08/2002 2:49:08 PM PDT by okie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: tellw
I fear these numbers are inflated by the Liberal Post to boost Democratic voting. Beware the "devil" Washington Post.
29 posted on 09/08/2002 4:04:45 PM PDT by Doe Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DrDeb; ohioWfan; rintense; kayak; Kath; mtngrl@vrwc; NordP; GUIDO; olliemb; MJY1288; admiralsn; ...
Check out these numbers!!!
30 posted on 09/08/2002 5:36:38 PM PDT by Wphile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: randita
Did you know there is an interesting scenario unfolding. If Talent wins over Carnahan, the Senate may return to Republican control at once. This is now being researched in Missouri, but it seems the laws are clear that Carnahan will not return after the election and Talent would get her spot.
31 posted on 09/08/2002 5:58:01 PM PDT by OldFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: okie01
Thus, a serious beating at the polls is likely to further radicalize the Democrat party. Which would tend to pull them into ever more marginal positions, eventually reducing the Democrats to a radical rump. And a merger with Nader's Greens...

Thomas Jefferson said something along the lines of this, "Two men can look at the exact set of facts and draw diametrically opposed conclusions." This appears to be the case here.

The banking and other business interests that run the democrat party do not want a marginalized party on the scale of the greens. They need two parties to play off against each other. Therefore, the leadership of the dem party, under a republican wipeout scenario, would say "You must move to where most voters are or we will not finance you."

The dems, being more heavily financed be far fewer interests than the broader sponsered repubs, would have to play ball. If those who finance the party are unable to secure their interests in that manner, they'd probably run (and heavily finance) their own dark horse candidate to restore some modicum of viability to the wounded donkey.

32 posted on 09/08/2002 8:47:46 PM PDT by joeyman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: mwl1
Good point! Think I might go shopping tomorrow! And, this is a poll after Labor Day when most people are paying more attention.
33 posted on 09/08/2002 8:53:16 PM PDT by Lauratealeaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: tellw
The stat that excites me the most is "1% say they're NOT voting". If only that were true, the repubs would win in a landslide.
34 posted on 09/08/2002 11:32:56 PM PDT by CyberAnt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

bump
35 posted on 09/08/2002 11:39:45 PM PDT by GretchenEE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Always Right
The funny thing is, the RATS are using the opposition to the Iraq war for political purposes. They hope to get enough Americans to oppose it that it helps them get elected! It appears to be failing so far, a poll I saw today says 80% of Americans think we should bomb Iraq! The RATS must be pulling their fur out!
36 posted on 09/08/2002 11:43:47 PM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JameRetief
Right now, are you inclined to vote to re-elect your representative in Congress in the next election, or are you inclined to look around for someone else to vote for?

This is by far the most important question, IMHO. In order for the Rats to win back the House, they have to win a sizable majority of the truly "up-for-grabs" seats, and in order to keep the Senate they can't lose a single seat. If the incumbent races question remains a virtual tie or continues trending downward in the "throw the bums out" direction overall, then we win, even before you factor in all the things like the built-in Rat poll bias, MOE, etc. The overall GOP favorability ratings and individual "vote GOP or Dem" questions attest to it. The more volatility in the "keep or dump your Congressman" area, the more Republicans will win.

Barring some sort of major event between now and election day, I don't see how the Rats can turn this around.

37 posted on 09/08/2002 11:49:23 PM PDT by Timesink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Green Knight
I REALLY hope you're right, but I expect the GOP to choke sometime between now and then.

I don't even think it's a matter of whether the GOP chokes or not. The Democrats are digging their own grave with their anti-Bush, anti-war, whiny empty rhetoric. All we need to do is keep our mouths shut and step back.

38 posted on 09/08/2002 11:51:42 PM PDT by Timesink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Mike Darancette
Why was the LA Times Generic poll touted on CNN showing the Rats up 10%?

Because it was CNN!

39 posted on 09/08/2002 11:52:50 PM PDT by Timesink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend
You mean if when Old Maid Carny loses the election, she has to step down immediately? Oh, that would be SUCH sweet revenge.
40 posted on 09/08/2002 11:56:07 PM PDT by Timesink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-58 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson