Rasmussen: Americans believe Condi by 2-1 over Clarke

Basso you continue to exhibit a clear and present desperation. Whatever you do don't even try to refute the facts presented in other quality threads (you obviously can't ) just ignore them and start your own flimsy thread from whatever feeble source you can dredge up...

 

Newsweek's Poll released April 10th puts Kerry ahead of Bush (50% to 43%) even with Nader factored in (46% to 42%) and shows that 59% of people are dissatisfied with the way this country is going as compared to 36% who are.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4709863/

 

The Newsweek poll is segmented on readers who read a magazine, some say are slighted to the left...who think more left in general than they think right. I'd put more stock in the rasmussenreport

 

Didn't realize we were telling the truth by polling instead of the evidence.


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/09/opinion/polls/printable611077.shtml
WAS BUSH ADMINISTRATION PAYING ENOUGH ATTENTION TO TERRORISM BEFORE 9/11?

Yes
Now
25%
Last week
18%

No
Now
68%
Last week
71%



DID BUSH ADMINISTRATION DO ALL IT COULD TO PREVENT 9/11?

Yes
Now
32%
Last week
22%

No
Now
60%
Last week
69%

WHAT THEY KNEW BEFORE 9/11: IS THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION…?

Telling entire truth
Now
21%
Last week
24%

Telling mostly truth, but hiding something
Now
66%
Last week
58%

Mostly lying
Now
10%
Last week
14%

 

all we need to complete the crystal clear picture is a ZRB-old skool:

a.) poll

b.) poll, poll

c.) poll, poll, poll

d.) or poll approved before it was voted against poll...

 

Woofer,

No one could have prevented 9-11.

No one.

DD

 

-->
With certainty.

But with more awareness, precaution and some stroke of luck, who knows.

Yet without the fundamental change of policies, it would happen in another time, in some other form.

Hope that's what you mean by your terse assertion.

 

was that a poll of dumb americans?

 

Support for Iraq conflict erodes: poll
Sun Apr 11, 3:38 PM ET Add Politics - AFP to My Yahoo!

WASHINGTON (AFP) - US support for the conflict in Iraq (news - web sites) is eroding, according to the latest CNN/Time survey, which found, amid a new Iraqi insurgency against US troops, that 57 percent of Americans think US military goals will fail unless a tougher stance is taken.

Approval of US President George W. Bush (news - web sites) and his administration's handling of Iraq was down to 44 percent of Americans, according to the poll, new elements of which were released Sunday, down from 51 percent surveyed March 26-28.

Meanwhile, Bush's overall approval rating had sunk to a record low of 49 percent since CNN/Time started polling the earliest days of the Bush presidency in 2001.

Surveyed after insurgents backing rebel Shiite Muslim leader Moqtada al-Sadr launched their onslaught against the US-led occupation last weekend, 57 percent said more intense US military efforts were needed to combat the rebels' action.

But some 36 percent said the recent attacks showed the United States, due to hand over power to Iraqis on June 30, is unlikely to achieve its goals in Iraq and needs to begin reducing its military efforts there.

A majority say the United States should hand power to the Iraqis on June 30 -- a date Bush says is "fixed" -- while 38 percent think it should keep power beyond that date.

A hefty 87 percent of those surveyed believe that creating a stable democratic government in Iraq will be either somewhat or very difficult, according to the poll.

Just over half the respondents, or 51 percent, disapproved of the president's management of Iraq, according to the poll which was conducted April 8.

Overall, 47 percent said they disapproved of the way Bush is handling his job as president.

However, public perception of Bush as a strong fighter of terrorism remained robust, a majority of 55 percent backed Bush in this regard against 39 percent who disapproved.

On the economy -- which consistently ranks amongst the public's highest concerns -- a minority of 41 percent expressed satisfation with Bush while 54 percent disapproved of his economic management of the country.

The telephone poll canvassed 1,005 adults. The margin of error was three percent

 

see? Who's right?

 

Most polls are sketchy but Rasmussen Reports is notoriously slanted to the right. Scott Rasmussen is a well-known conservative speaker and writer and his polls ask specifically leading questions to get specific answers.

His polls are almost always inaccurate for that reason.

It would be like having Maureen Dowd conducting polls. I'm guessing that they would come back leaning heavily towards the left.

Personally, I don't care about the politics of it all, but I personally cannot stand slanted polls and studies. Whenever I see a study saying eating lots of dairy is really good for you and it is sponsored by the Dairy Producers of America, it irks me. Same deal here.

 

I'm presuming this wasn't a polll conducted of just Newsweek readers. Since this was a poll conducted over a few days I would presume that it is more thorough than a daily tracking poll.

 

hey basso...

what points of Clarke and Rice's testimony contradict each other?

That way we can see what the people believe.

Let me know, thx.

PS, have you read Clarke's book yet?

Or are you just crapping on its content and his credibility without having read it...?

 

I support you Basso.

DaDakota,

You are absolutely right about 9/11 and being unpreventable. As I said before, if it wasn't 9/11, it would've been 9/12 or some other time.

All polls are slanted. The only non slanted poll is the election itself. There is no "accurate" poll at all. Until 100% of voting Americans are polled, none will ever be accurate, which is why I don't pay any attention to the filth that Newsweek vomits.

plcmts17: Don't be gay, Sparky.

 

So we can just save all of the billions we're spending on national security.

There's nothing we can do to prevent terrorist attacks.

Nothing.

 

Bush's problem with this 9-11 Commission isn't the specific memo. Its not whether he could have prevented this specific attack. It just calls into question what's supposed to be Bush's strength, he's supposed to be the president best for defense. He's increasingly looking like he isn't even good on national security issues and if you don't trust him with national security, why vote for him.