My tix versus your signature. Sound fun? I appreciate your signature challenge but after all the **** I have talked should Bush not win by enough the least I can do before I peel the feather's off the crow to eat is give you some Rocket tickets. There are some folks on the board that know I'm good for 'em Email me at cmcclain at cbs dot com and we'll work it out! I love when stuff from the bbs translates into real life!
Thank you for the insight and the clarification Batman Jones. Especially providing the wide varience from multiple poll stations. I guess the only thing they prove is that this will be a close election. Perhaps just as close as Bush-Gore.
Okay, that's true. But. He's better when he's behind when he's run against Republicans in Massachusetts and against Democrats in Iowa. Evenly divided battleground states are a whole new game. I understand that Kerry will turn up the intensity and I'm glad of it. But his history of comeback victories is little comfort in the battleground states. I'm getting a little tired of being told not to worry after he just blew the whole month of August and a clear but small lead. He needs to turn it on now.
1. Yes. 2. Yes. 3. Who can say? Turnout will be higher in every category in 04. We had peace and prosperity last time. This time the stakes couldn't be higher. Add to that the fact that every single voter in every single batteground state has a chance to be a hero. For myself, I haven't decided yet whether to register in PA where I am now or vote absentee in NM where I'm registered. It's actually a tough call. It's actually feasible that that decision could decide the race. Sounds stupid I know, but I actually think this race is closer than 2000 as of today. Everyone in a battleground state knows his vote counts more than it ever has before. Anyone who's ever considered voting will this time. And that's why the polls just have to be off, whether they favor Bush or Kerry. They are almost all targeted at "likely voters," which means they're only talking to people who voted last time. I think I represent the majority when I say that, in 2000, I didn't think: 1. it made a lot of difference who won, or 2. that my vote would ever matter. This time everybody on both sides knows it makes a lot of difference who wins and those of us in battleground states KNOW our votes matter. All bets are off. This is the most interesting election of my lifetime.
Exactly. The implication is that Kerry will fare better against W than did Gore. Another consideration is turnout which the Democrats and their surrogates (like ACT) are heavily pushing. A heavier Democratic turnout, especially in the battle gorund states, favors Kerry. Minimally, Kerry should carry the same states as Gore, plus Florida where I am expecting a record Democratic turnout.
Very generous offer, Chance. I appreciate it. And the best part of it is I won't even have to change my signature! Gotta love that. I really like handicapping the battleground states too and it's a conversation I think we can count on not to get too heated. Let's keep it going.
This is exactly why the Bush-Rove strategy now is to campaign heavily in heavily Republican parts of the battleground states. Their registration and turnout will be up as well. And you can trust that they're working on it at least as hard as our side. I understand your confidence but I don't entirely share it. Except in Florida. I would be blown away if Bush could pull that off.
I predict that the Republican turnout will be at best the same as it was in 2000. GWB has alienated his base. Record deficits. Unnecessary wars. Crappy economy.
No Worries: You should also understand, if you don't already, that the blue states lost electoral votes since 2000. Kerry has to do a little better than barely better than Gore.
And he has lost some voters on account of that. Some on this board even. But they're not from his base. His base will be out in droves. Some of them may be unhappy about the deficits, but they imagine worse ones under Kerry (they're wrong, but they do). And guns, God, gays, anti-UN, anti-French, pro-war sentiment and hanging on to their tax cuts (yes, even those poor types that got $300 and saw their cost of living increase) will be enough to motivate them. Why do you think Bush went so far right when the general election started? It was an unusual strategy but it wasn't a mistake. He knows what he's doing.
They don't have a moratorium that I know about, but the Army is budgeted for a certain number of troops and Kerry wants to raise that number by 40,000.
Chance, 57% is a massive victory. the greatest percent ever is 61.1% and i think it's safe to say this election is extremely even and won't reach anything near that. 52 or 53 percent would be a fairly high % for either candidate i think. i'm not sure either could get 57% if the other was seen partying with osama and saddam the night before the election. 57% is even harder to achieve especially when you consider nader will get some votes and that clinton never even got 50% thanks to a 3rd party running. now 300-316 in the electoral college is possible as it is much more sensitive than the popular vote. guys have gotten 500+ with only 60% in the popular. now, even though i lean slightly bush and don't wanna see a fellow bush supporter lose a bet, can i also get some rockets tickets if bush doesn't get over 57%?
It is not really my confidence that is talking. I am not sure that Kerry will win. I do strongly suspect that he will though. Part of my reasons is that Kerry is not Gore, i.e. Kerry will not leave the Democratic luke warm and yawning. Kerry also does not mind trading blows with GWB and his team. This is something Gore should have done last time. Kerry also is known as a strong closer in races and a good debater. All in all, Kerry is a good strong Democrat candidate. (much stronger than the Republicans on this board give him credit for). GWB is also a strong candidate, but he has several severe weakness of which the main two are the economy and the Iraq War. Neither issue will likely "turn the corner" by November 2. And both of these issues should get strong traction with the moderates. BTW, I am stunned that GWB has agreed to debates. GWB is a terrible debater who has a poor command of the facts. If Kerry has a strong showing and appears "presidential", GWB is screwed. In 2000, GWB wasn't the President with four years of experience. This time round GWB's fumbles and gafts will make a competent Kerry look more presidential.
Easier said than done! I can already hear one of these guys saying, "OHIO! How in the hell can he take OHIO? You're on crack!"
Bush and Kerry are always in Ohio. I'd venture to say they have been in Ohio more than any other state. So they both have alot invested here (time and money on ads) I have not seen a poll since teh RNC but before it was a dead heat 46% Bush 46% Kerry.
"Rasmussen has started publishing a 3-day rolling average every day. For Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, (all post-speech), Bush's lead nationally has shrunk to 1.2%. Rasmussen looked at the Time and Newsweek polls we had yesterday and said the samples had too many Republicans in them. When he corrected for this effect, he concluded that the Time and Newsweek data might support the conclusion of a 3% Bush lead, not more. This observation is noteworthy because it is relatively rare when one pollster says that his colleagues blew it." http://www.electoral-vote.com/
That has always been Karl Rove's strategy. Nice to see you're on board. Wouldn't want to stray from the Rove/RNC line, would you. "Whatever it takes" was the strategy at the Republican convention as well. After seeing that garbage-fest, it will crack me up to read any complaints about the Kerry campaign. And, after watching the spew of lies, distortions, and venom the Republican Far-Right Leadership put on, with their token "moderate" Republicans for a day or two, followed by the last couple of days of pure vitriol, I would say that it's past time for the Kerry campaign to take the gloves off, and start giving better than what's being thrown at them. If your opponent is covering you with truckloads full of dirt and garbage, then get your own trucks out of storage, gas them up, and get to work. Obviously, the kind of campaign Kerry/Edwards would like to run isn't going to cut it. A good start? Begin running commercials asking why Bush didn't take his physical to maintain his flight status in the National Guard. I've said before that I could care less about what Bush, or Cheney (who used five different deferments to stay out of the Draft) did to keep far away from Nam, but if Bush/Cheney/Rove are going to use Vietnam as a campaign centerpiece of their dirt-slinging against the Kerry ticket, then come right back at them. Bush has no answer for why he didn't take the required physical to maintain his flight status... a flight status the government paid tens of thousands of dollars to train Bush to achieve. Bush has no answer at all. This isn't about his "missing year." It's about responsibility and meeting his requirements for Guard service. If one wanted to use the word, it is about honor and honoring his commitment to the Guard and the country. When he refused to take the physical, and lost his flight status, then he was about as much use to the Guard and the Nation as a private cleaning latrines. Explain that, George. Why didn't you take the physical to keep your flight status in the National Guard? And what happened to the records of the required investigation into why you didn't do it?
