Bush v. Kerry polls don't mean much until after the party conventions anyways. Someone in this thread said that Bush is doing as much campaigning as the Dems right now, but that's not really the case. Wait until the conventions...
I didn't say it was equal, just that he's never really stopped. Not that he's the first politician we can say that about...
I am an independent for Kerry. And 3 years ago I would have been a independent for McCain. I didn't vote last time. I didn't like Gore or Bush.
Bingo! That's the practical view point. But, more importantly, "elitism" and "power" can undermine democracy.
If you don't like either major party candidate, vote independent! The independent candidate probably won't win, but if they get a large enough percentage of the vote then they are included in the televised debates and get taken more seriously in general. We need more options, options other than Republicrats and Demoblicans.
Don't go there. Nadir was what cost Gore the election and, as much as Gore put me to sleep and as much as I hated his election strategy, I'd take him over Shrub in a New York minute. This is not the election to "make a statement" with. In my opinion, this is the election to save the country from the worst President in modern times. Give it some thought. (or maybe I didn't have my sarcasm meter running. )
Popular theory but highly disputed. Most analysts say more Perot voters would have voted Clinton in a two-way race.
How the Electoral College Works (FEC website) And I agree - this is the worst president of modern times.
Of course, if one is voting from a state that could go either way - voting for the person most likely to beat Bush is the best option. In Texas, vote independent.
Poll finds Kerry with big lead among Democrats Foresees close matchup with Bush Saturday, February 7, 2004 (CNN) -- Sen. John Kerry holds a dominant edge over his Democratic presidential rivals in a nationwide CNN/Time poll released Saturday night, but all the leading Democrats trail President Bush in hypothetical one-on-one matchups -- though results pitting Bush against Kerry or Sen. John Edwards fell within the poll's margin of error. Kerry, of Massachusetts, was preferred by 43 percent of the 377 registered Democrats or Democratic-leaning voters. Edwards, a North Carolina senator, polled 18 percent, and retired Gen. Wesley Clark was the choice of 11 percent. Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean had 8 percent, civil rights activist Al Sharpton 6 percent and Rep. Dennis Kucinich, 5 percent. The balance of registered Democrats had no preference, or weren't sure of their choice. The margin of error was 5.7 percentage points. In a hypothetical matchup against Bush, Kerry trailed 50 percent to 48 among likely voters with a 4.1 percentage-point margin of error. For Kerry, it was big improvement from a month ago, when he trailed Bush 54-40 in a similar comparison. Edwards also trailed Bush in a hypothetical contest, 52 to 46 percent -- a better showing than a month ago, when he trailed 53 to 39. In a hypothetical matchup with Clark, Bush led 55-41 percent. The president's approval rating was at 54 percent, with 42 percent disapproving of his performance in office. Bush's approval rating has been remarkably stable in the Time/CNN poll, since July never dipping below 52 percent or above 55 percent. Kerry's advantage over other Democrats mirrors his remarkable surge in the opening rounds of primaries and caucuses. The Massachusetts senator won nine of the first 11 contests, including projected wins in the Washington and Michigan caucuses Saturday. In a nationwide Time/CNN poll taken just days before the January 19 New Hampshire primary, Kerry and Edwards were tied for third place with 9 percent apiece. Howard Dean led with 19 percent, while Wesley Clark had 14 percent. One sign of trouble One sign of trouble for Kerry in the new poll: 21 percent said the fact he represents Massachusetts, "a state that is more liberal than most others," would make them less likely to vote for him. Ten percent said it makes him more likely to get their vote, while 67 percent said it made no difference. A significant majority in the poll found both Kerry and Bush "likeable," but respondents showed a high degree of cynicism about the electoral process. Asked if the statement "would say anything to get elected president" applies to Kerry, 44 percent said yes, while just 40 percent said no. Asked the same of Bush, 52 percent said yes, while 45 percent said no. The survey was conducted by telephone, February 5 and 6, interviewing 1,000 Americans age 18 and older.
NEWSWEEK POLL: Bush's Approval Rating Slips to New Low (48%); Fifty Percent of Voters Say They Don't Want to See Him Re-Elected (45% Do) NEW YORK, Feb. 7 /PRNewswire/ -- President George W. Bush's approval rating has slipped to 48 percent, the lowest level since February 2001, according to the Newsweek poll. Fifty percent of registered voters say they would not like to see Bush re-elected to a second term (45% say they would). And if the election were held today, Democratic frontrunner Sen. John Kerry would win over Bush by 50 percent to 45 percent among registered voters. However Bush would have clear wins over Democratic contenders Sen. John Edwards (49% to 44%), former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean (50% to 44%) and retired General Wesley Clark (51% to 43%). Sen. Kerry has also strengthened his lead among Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters in the race for the Democratic nomination. Kerry places first in the field with 48 percent, while Dean, his closest rival, follows with 13 percent (last week Kerry led with 45% to Dean's 14%). Edwards is in third place with 10 percent, followed by Clark with nine percent (an improvement of four points for Clark who last week received 5%). Almost two-thirds (65%) of Democrats and Democratic-leaners say Kerry is their first or second choice, followed by Dean (32%) and Edwards (31%). Meanwhile, following the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's ruling last week that its landmark decision in support of gay marriage meant full marriage rights and not civil unions, almost half (45%) of Americans say efforts to protect the rights of gays and lesbians have gone too far; 25 percent say more effort is needed, 22 percent say the right amount of effort has been made. Fifty-eight percent of Americans says there should not be legally-sanctioned gay marriages (33% disagree), while 51 percent say there should not be legally-sanctioned gay and lesbian unions or partnerships (40% disagree). Americans, however, are more deeply and more evenly divided on whether they support an amendment to the Constitution. Forty-seven percent say they would favor a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage in all states, with 45 percent opposing it. (Of those numbers 43% would strongly favor it, while 35% would strongly oppose it). Despite their views on gay marriage, Americans are almost evenly split on whether gays and lesbians should have the right to legally adopt children; 47 percent say they should not, while 45 percent disagree. When it comes to economic issues, a large majority (60%) says gay spouses should have health insurance and other employee benefits (33% disagree). Sixty percent also say gay spouses should have inheritance rights (30% disagree) and 55 percent say they should have social security benefits (36% disagree). An overwhelming majority of Americans (87%) says that there should be equal rights for gays and lesbians in terms of job opportunities (10% disagree) and 60 percent say gays and lesbians should be able to openly serve in the military (29% disagree). Fifty-four percent of registered voters say the issue of gay marriage will be either very important (22%) or somewhat important (32%) in determining their vote for president this year. Twenty percent say it won't be too important and 21 percent say it's not at all important. Thirty-eight percent say Bush comes closer to reflecting their own views on gay marriage, while 29 percent say Kerry does. Asked about Bush and Kerry's stance on gay marriage, a majority (54%) of registered voters respond "don't know" when asked Kerry's views, compared with 29 percent who say the same of Bush. Forty-nine percent say, based on what they've seen in the news, Bush would support a Constitutional amendment, if necessary, to ban gay marriage in all states (7% say Kerry would do the same). Twelve percent say Bush believes the issue should be left up to individual states (14% say this of Kerry); nine percent say Bush supports gay civil unions but not gay marriage (17% say this of Kerry); and one percent says Bush favors full marriage rights for gays and lesbians (8% say this of Kerry). Turning to the role of candidates' wives in the presidential race, almost a third (31%) of Americans say former First Lady Hillary Clinton comes closest to their image of what a first lady should be (Ouch, that's gotta hurt, uh conservatives); in a three-way tie for second place are First Lady Laura Bush and former First Ladies Barbara Bush and Nancy Reagan, with 20 percent each. Almost two thirds (62%) say a first lady should be involved in politics, while 32 percent disagree; 75 percent of Democrats feel this way (21% disagree); and 50 percent of Republicans feel this way (44% disagree). When deciding which presidential candidate to support, 67 percent say it is either very important (25%) or somewhat important (42%) for them to learn about the candidate's spouse. Seventy-two percent say the relationship between a candidate and his spouse tells voters either a lot (40%) or something (32%) about how good a president he would be; 13 percent say it tells you not much and 12 percent say it tells you nothing. For this Newsweek poll, Princeton Survey Research Associates interviewed 1,004 adults aged 18 and older on February 5-6, 2004. The margin of error is plus or minus three percentage points. This poll is part of the February 16 issue of Newsweek (on Newsstands Monday, February 9).
just curious, since this is a texas board, shouldn't there be more republicans voting in this poll? im actually really suprised that there are such a large number of democrats and independants in here, and thats a good thing. if no one pipes up, im just going to continue assuming that a good percentage of republicans dont like sports or dont have computers. the articles are nice, its good to know that it might be an interesting and close election, that will get more people to vote and get involved, something our country seriously needs. more voting, less compliance.
Although Bush has violated my principles and on the domestic front, been worse than Clinton (Yes, I just did say that. It doesn't make me proud, but it's the truth.), I've got to vote Bush. On issues of national security, we can't trust the party of appeasement, weakness and political expediency to wage and win the war on terror. The Democrats are as big a threat to our national security with their ill-conceived good intentions as Al Queda is. Good link on John F*@#$ing Kerry's war record. link I'll unfortunately be pinching my nose and pulling the lever for Bush.
Yeah, all that peace we had during the Clinton years were ****ty. Obviously Bush, with his mulititude of wars, terrorist attacks under his watch, and complete lack of respect around the world makes for a far safer country.
Come on, bama, you're smart enough to know a little history. Which party has gotten us into a war prior to the first Gulf War? Uh, let's see... Wilson- WWI FDR- WWII Truman- Korean War JFK/LBJ- Vietnam War Clinton- The Balkan Conflict Hey! They're all Democrats! And, in my opinion, a Democrat would have responded to the invasion of Kuwait in much the same way as Bush Senior... maybe even more forcefully regarding Saddam. Who knows? If anything, one could argue that the country is more likely to start shootin' with a Democrat in office. And plenty of people might be concerned about that. I'm not, but I'm trying to be fair.
