everything ive read in the past few months is crazy
he drinks, he does coke, he uses listening devices during all speechs, he has dyslexia (reason for listening devices)
its crazy its like he is a robot or something. who is controling the robot? the VP college drop out.
this adminastration is the most whacked out shyt ive ever seen. i look for someone with intellect i think about it maybe every other day maybe every 3rd day. i say to myself 'rob youre wrong, the republican method is just fine. the bush administration has done well, they deserve to win, becuase that is whats best.' but i read and i read and no one sounds intelligble like the dems do. no one makes a case for the republican party sounding smart. everytime they talk they just sound annoying and have a very blameless atittude which disgusts me to no end. why. i try to see it the republican way becuase ive been that way all my life. but there isnt a single article or post that justifys what they are doing.
he drinks, he does coke, he uses listening devices during all speechs, he has dyslexia (reason for listening devices)
its crazy its like he is a robot or something. who is controling the robot? the VP college drop out.
this adminastration is the most whacked out shyt ive ever seen. i look for someone with intellect i think about it maybe every other day maybe every 3rd day. i say to myself 'rob youre wrong, the republican method is just fine. the bush administration has done well, they deserve to win, becuase that is whats best.' but i read and i read and no one sounds intelligble like the dems do. no one makes a case for the republican party sounding smart. everytime they talk they just sound annoying and have a very blameless atittude which disgusts me to no end. why. i try to see it the republican way becuase ive been that way all my life. but there isnt a single article or post that justifys what they are doing.
He received a bachelor's degree from Yale University in 1968, then served as an F-102 fighter pilot in the Texas Air National Guard. President Bush received a Master of Business Administration from Harvard Business School in 1975.
Yale and Harvard don't just give out degrees. Also you have to know a thing or two to fly a jet airplane even if it was the TX ANG.
If you don't like his policies or the way he is leading the country then fine, but don't say he can't read and people are in his ear telling him what to say. He appears to not be the greatest public speaker, but who cares if you agree with his policies. Kerry is a better public speaker etc...but I don't want higher taxes, more gov. programs and just "leaving social security alone" and I also don't see terrorism as a "nusiance" like illegal gambling (that's ironic on this site! :biglaugh: ) and prostitution.
Yale and Harvard don't just give out degrees. Also you have to know a thing or two to fly a jet airplane even if it was the TX ANG.
If you don't like his policies or the way he is leading the country then fine, but don't say he can't read and people are in his ear telling him what to say. He appears to not be the greatest public speaker, but who cares if you agree with his policies. Kerry is a better public speaker etc...but I don't want higher taxes, more gov. programs and just "leaving social security alone" and I also don't see terrorism as a "nusiance" like illegal gambling (that's ironic on this site! :biglaugh: ) and prostitution.
Honestly Rob,
I would prefer to keep political disscussions in the political forum.. But the Mods at this site have turned the gambling forum into a bash Bush board.
I've tried to keep this thread on the gambling aspect, as there now exists real value in the Bush side of the wager.
But it becomes difficult to stay on topic when this sites' mods are content to post political cartoons and propaganda, which have nothing to do with gambling, instead of facts.
If you really want to know why people are turning to Bush it's simple -
They may not like Bush but they don't want to replace him with another Jimmy Carter.
They don't want their taxes raised and they don't want their defense cut.
I would prefer to keep political disscussions in the political forum.. But the Mods at this site have turned the gambling forum into a bash Bush board.
I've tried to keep this thread on the gambling aspect, as there now exists real value in the Bush side of the wager.
But it becomes difficult to stay on topic when this sites' mods are content to post political cartoons and propaganda, which have nothing to do with gambling, instead of facts.
If you really want to know why people are turning to Bush it's simple -
They may not like Bush but they don't want to replace him with another Jimmy Carter.
They don't want their taxes raised and they don't want their defense cut.
What people are turning to Bush? His lead has totally evaporated since the convention. The truth is this election is a done deal and you are touting this forum into what obviously is a very bad bet. As far as the so called "mod" thing goes - what difference does it make who posts what? Moderators are posters also and have opinions like anyone else. Kerry's campaign has caight fire thanks to the overwelming frustration the American people feel about the policies of George Bush. Kerry is taking the fight to Bush and exposing him for what he is: the worst president in the history of the United States. No incumbent with his rancid approval numbers has ever been re-elected. This will be an easy win for Kerry on November 2nd.
Concorde basically, I believe that the people who dislike George Bush will be more strongly motivated to go to the polls than those people who dislike John Kerry. Except for a minority of Vietnam veterans, most of the people who can be said to dislike Kerry just wish they had another choice. I'm in that group. I'd much prefer Howard Dean, who reminds me of Harry Truman. With Dean, you know without any equivocation what he believes and how he feels. That's rare in today's politicians.
But Kerry is the nominee, and stuffiness and wordiness aside, I prefer a man who seriously studies issues and desires a lot of input, even from people who disagree with him. Bush apparently prefers snap decisions and dislikes a lot of input, especially from anyone who disagrees with him. That's OK when you're deciding to start this pitcher or that pitcher or even if you're trying to decide where to drill an oil well. It is definitely not OK if the decision is war or peace.
But Kerry is the nominee, and stuffiness and wordiness aside, I prefer a man who seriously studies issues and desires a lot of input, even from people who disagree with him. Bush apparently prefers snap decisions and dislikes a lot of input, especially from anyone who disagrees with him. That's OK when you're deciding to start this pitcher or that pitcher or even if you're trying to decide where to drill an oil well. It is definitely not OK if the decision is war or peace.
Wilhelm
I guess ignoring reality is a staple for a liberal.
The polls which now show Bush leading 4-6% which a week ago showed Bush leading by 1-2% are the people who are turning to Bush.
You can make money here or not. It's up to you.
Deal in reality or delusions.
I don't want to go back to 10% unemployment.
I don't want my taxes raised.
I don't want our defenses lowered in this dangerous time.
It's what Bush said, not how he said it, that will carry the day.
I guess ignoring reality is a staple for a liberal.
The polls which now show Bush leading 4-6% which a week ago showed Bush leading by 1-2% are the people who are turning to Bush.
You can make money here or not. It's up to you.
Deal in reality or delusions.
I don't want to go back to 10% unemployment.
I don't want my taxes raised.
I don't want our defenses lowered in this dangerous time.
It's what Bush said, not how he said it, that will carry the day.
AP -Oct. 16, 2004 - Two magazines say any way you look at it, the presidential race is a dead heat.
The latest polls from Time and Newsweek show President Bush and John Kerry in a virtual tie.
The Time poll has Bush leading 48 percent to 46 percent among likely voters.
The Newsweek survey has the Bush ticket leading 48 percent to 47 percent among registered voters. When likely voters were polled, Bush took a 50-to-45-percent lead.
The margins of error in both polls make the race a statistical dead heat.
Nearly one in three voters in the Time poll said the debates made them more likely to vote for Kerry, while only 17 percent said the same about Bush.
Bush's approval rating in that poll fell below 50 percent for the second straight week. No incumbent has ever won re-election with a sub 50 percent approval rating this late in any campaign in history.
The latest polls from Time and Newsweek show President Bush and John Kerry in a virtual tie.
The Time poll has Bush leading 48 percent to 46 percent among likely voters.
The Newsweek survey has the Bush ticket leading 48 percent to 47 percent among registered voters. When likely voters were polled, Bush took a 50-to-45-percent lead.
The margins of error in both polls make the race a statistical dead heat.
Nearly one in three voters in the Time poll said the debates made them more likely to vote for Kerry, while only 17 percent said the same about Bush.
Bush's approval rating in that poll fell below 50 percent for the second straight week. No incumbent has ever won re-election with a sub 50 percent approval rating this late in any campaign in history.
More Reasons the Polls are Wrong!
One - No poll is measuring cell phone users, unlisted numbers, people who have moved or changed numbers within the last six months, and often people who have not voted in the previous election. And let's not even pretend that the polls adequately measure minorities. Up to 20% of the population is off the map, and most of them are Democrats.
Two - There is a built in fudge factor on the polls and that allows the pollsters to spin it the way they want. It's called the "likely voter" qualifications. Notice how almost all the headlines talk about "likely voters" and you have to really dig to find the results for all voters in the poll. Recently several polls were released on Ohio and Pennsylvania that had Bush up among "likely voters" by two points, yet among all voters, Kerry was up by three points and four points. Each poll defines "likely voters" for itself. In other words, they can make the poll say what they want it to say.
Three - The right-leaning media WANTS to portray this race as tight; wants to portray it as "President Bush holding a slim lead against the tenacious challenge by Senator Kerry - who will win? stay tuned!!!!" When you look past the headlines into the data, you see that Kerry IS ahead. Talk about something funky going on . . .
Fourth - Even Zogby says the "horse race" poll is basically meaningless. That one is for the right-leaning media which loves six-word headlines and soundbites. The real polling is the state polling, which is more methodical, more accurate, and of course, the actual vote that will elect the president - the Electoral College. When you look at the state-by-state races, you see a veritable landslide for Kerry. Zogby has it Kerry 278, Bush 207 with Ohio, Florida, and Arkansas too close to call. You need 270 to win, so Kerry already has the winning margin. LA Times has a great site where you can play out scenarios with the Electoral College. If you are honest about what the state polls are saying you come to the conclusion that Bush is way behind where it counts.
Fifth - SmilingMonk mentioned that the undecideds break 2:1 for the challenger at the last moment. Correct. Zogby points out that less than one in five undecideds think Bush deserves to be reelected. As in - he won't be. Bush would need a five point lead to win on election day.
One - No poll is measuring cell phone users, unlisted numbers, people who have moved or changed numbers within the last six months, and often people who have not voted in the previous election. And let's not even pretend that the polls adequately measure minorities. Up to 20% of the population is off the map, and most of them are Democrats.
Two - There is a built in fudge factor on the polls and that allows the pollsters to spin it the way they want. It's called the "likely voter" qualifications. Notice how almost all the headlines talk about "likely voters" and you have to really dig to find the results for all voters in the poll. Recently several polls were released on Ohio and Pennsylvania that had Bush up among "likely voters" by two points, yet among all voters, Kerry was up by three points and four points. Each poll defines "likely voters" for itself. In other words, they can make the poll say what they want it to say.
Three - The right-leaning media WANTS to portray this race as tight; wants to portray it as "President Bush holding a slim lead against the tenacious challenge by Senator Kerry - who will win? stay tuned!!!!" When you look past the headlines into the data, you see that Kerry IS ahead. Talk about something funky going on . . .
Fourth - Even Zogby says the "horse race" poll is basically meaningless. That one is for the right-leaning media which loves six-word headlines and soundbites. The real polling is the state polling, which is more methodical, more accurate, and of course, the actual vote that will elect the president - the Electoral College. When you look at the state-by-state races, you see a veritable landslide for Kerry. Zogby has it Kerry 278, Bush 207 with Ohio, Florida, and Arkansas too close to call. You need 270 to win, so Kerry already has the winning margin. LA Times has a great site where you can play out scenarios with the Electoral College. If you are honest about what the state polls are saying you come to the conclusion that Bush is way behind where it counts.
Fifth - SmilingMonk mentioned that the undecideds break 2:1 for the challenger at the last moment. Correct. Zogby points out that less than one in five undecideds think Bush deserves to be reelected. As in - he won't be. Bush would need a five point lead to win on election day.
Some voter breakdown after 3rd debate.
NEW YORK, Oct 16 (AP) - President George W. Bush and challenger John Kerry were in a dead heat 17 days before Election Day, according to a poll out Saturday, although Kerry won the three debates.
Bush, preferred by 48 percent of likely voters and Kerry by 46, were separated by less than the margin of error of plus or minus four percentage points, the Time poll said.
Bush lost the third debate Wednesday by nine points, the poll said.
Thirty percent of voters said the three debates had made them lean toward Kerry, while only 17 percent said so of Bush.
Registered voters said Kerry beat Bush overall in the debates, by 57-25 percent, in the poll taken October 14-15.
Respondents included 1,000 reported registered voters and 865 likely voters. The margin of error for registered voters was plus or minus three percentage points, while that of the likely voters was plus or minus four points.
The poll also showed that Kerry's views better expressed voters' positions 54-39 percent.
Kerry had a better understanding of the issues by 49-40 percent. Kerry also seemed more presidential, 49-44, and was more believable, than Bush, by 48-44 percent, the poll found.
NEW YORK, Oct 16 (AP) - President George W. Bush and challenger John Kerry were in a dead heat 17 days before Election Day, according to a poll out Saturday, although Kerry won the three debates.
Bush, preferred by 48 percent of likely voters and Kerry by 46, were separated by less than the margin of error of plus or minus four percentage points, the Time poll said.
Bush lost the third debate Wednesday by nine points, the poll said.
Thirty percent of voters said the three debates had made them lean toward Kerry, while only 17 percent said so of Bush.
Registered voters said Kerry beat Bush overall in the debates, by 57-25 percent, in the poll taken October 14-15.
Respondents included 1,000 reported registered voters and 865 likely voters. The margin of error for registered voters was plus or minus three percentage points, while that of the likely voters was plus or minus four points.
The poll also showed that Kerry's views better expressed voters' positions 54-39 percent.
Kerry had a better understanding of the issues by 49-40 percent. Kerry also seemed more presidential, 49-44, and was more believable, than Bush, by 48-44 percent, the poll found.
Wil, that 2:1 brwaking for challanger thing is true and probably more so true this year. It's the reason why it's better to look at Bush's number rather than the margin. 50% if the key for Bush. If the polls have him at 50 or above then he's looking good, but if he's at 47-48%, even if he is leading by 3 or 4 points, this is a bad sign for him. Historically, incumbents have always received a lower % than the latest polling numbers. The ONLY exception was Reagan in '84 receiving 59% when he polled 58%. And '04 Bush is no '84 Reagan.
Latest CNN/Gallup/USAToday has Bush now ahead by 8 points...http://www.gallup.com/election2004/
seventy-trey, the polls mean less and less were finnaly seeing the new era of presidential elections where the two partys just key in on battle ground states. the fact kerry is even or ahead in most nation wide polls would concern me as a bush backer it shows me he spends too much time in states he has already won. kerry is barley cali and he could care less he know hell win the 55 over there is a good example. and now you see in other state polls kerry is slowly stealing away strong bushes to make them barely bush and ultimately will be barely kerry.
its freakn dope wake up. what john kerry is doing is he will have a lot of barely kerrys going in that all win for him to get him the 270 + its brilliant. '01 rams style hes just doing things with the state polls and electoral you havent seen before. its ill, im tottaly diggn it.
the democrat game plan to win the election is freakn genious
its freakn dope wake up. what john kerry is doing is he will have a lot of barely kerrys going in that all win for him to get him the 270 + its brilliant. '01 rams style hes just doing things with the state polls and electoral you havent seen before. its ill, im tottaly diggn it.
the democrat game plan to win the election is freakn genious
Last edited:
Looks like some special little thread spinne .. err starter is in denial
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/special/polls/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/special/polls/index.html
The Debates
and I mean ALL three of them, read the transcripts of what was said and not how it was said. Bush looks and sounds stupid, even laughing at his own bad jokes, but he's the man for the job. Kerry is an intellectually bankrupt socialist pie in the sky opportunist without ability.
ya make your choice and take your chances.
and I mean ALL three of them, read the transcripts of what was said and not how it was said. Bush looks and sounds stupid, even laughing at his own bad jokes, but he's the man for the job. Kerry is an intellectually bankrupt socialist pie in the sky opportunist without ability.
ya make your choice and take your chances.
