Author Topic: Nash is this "poll" valid? (Read 534 times)

GRUNHERZ · « **on:** August 27, 2004, 08:33:04 PM »

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/27/bush.electoral/index.html

Sandman · « **Reply #1 on:** August 27, 2004, 08:34:54 PM »

DMF is the stats guy.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #2 on:** August 27, 2004, 08:36:09 PM »

Nash also fancies himself as an expert of sorts according to some of his posts...

midnight Target · « **Reply #3 on:** August 27, 2004, 08:44:01 PM »

Fancying yourself is a good thing.

Nash · « **Reply #4 on:** August 28, 2004, 01:48:21 AM »

Dumb question.

I can't believe how mistakenly my other posts on this subject have been taken.

Prolly the most straight forward stuff I've ever written in the whole entire history of this BBS.

Sure this poll is valid, they all are.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #5 on:** August 28, 2004, 01:56:01 AM »

Oops I meant is this poll meaningful (the opposite of meaningless)?

Nash · « **Reply #6 on:** August 28, 2004, 01:59:21 AM »

Yeah.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #7 on:** August 28, 2004, 02:04:32 AM »

What do you think about the results?

Nash · « **Reply #8 on:** August 28, 2004, 02:10:16 AM »

From a Kerry perspective...

It's been a bad, bad week.

Wisconsin flipped to Bush... as did Missouri...

Kerry had a short and very weak lead in Ohio and Florida, and that's been lost.

He's lost West Virginia, and a few solid Kerry states are now up for grabs.

Gunslinger · « **Reply #9 on:** August 28, 2004, 02:38:44 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nash
From a Kerry perspective...

It's been a bad, bad week.

Wisconsin flipped to Bush... as did Missouri...

Kerry had a short and very weak lead in Ohio and Florida, and that's been lost.

He's lost West Virginia, and a few solid Kerry states are now up for grabs.

To top it off the Grand Ole Party is about to have their convention. If I were a betting man I'd say Bush will get a bigger bump than kerry did after the DNC convention.

I also look at the "boost" kerry got when he picked edwards....it was lackluster at best.

Seriously and no animosity here.....I think democrats are realizing they got sold a bad bag of goods in the primaries and independents are catching wind of this.

They could have easily defeated Bush with a strong canidate but Kerry just isnt it.

SaburoS · « **Reply #10 on:** August 28, 2004, 03:11:28 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gunslinger
To top it off the Grand Ole Party is about to have their convention. If I were a betting man I'd say Bush will get a bigger bump than kerry did after the DNC convention.

I also look at the "boost" kerry got when he picked edwards....it was lackluster at best.

Seriously and no animosity here.....I think democrats are realizing they got sold a bad bag of goods in the primaries and independents are catching wind of this.

They could have easily defeated Bush with a strong canidate but Kerry just isnt it.

In all reality it looks like Bush will win reelection.

Naw, no matter who the Democrats put up, there will always be statements of "They should have someone else represent them."
LOL, remember when Dean was leading?

Gunslinger · « **Reply #11 on:** August 28, 2004, 03:28:26 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SaburoS
In all reality it looks like Bush will win reelection.

Naw, no matter who the Democrats put up, there will always be statements of "They should have someone else represent them."
LOL, remember when Dean was leading?

To be honest my friend.....I think the RNC was rooting for Dean. The odds of him self destructing before the end of the campaign are pretty good (SEE: YEEEEEAAARRRRGGHHHH) not to mention all his idiotic comments about "bush knowing about 911" and "security alerts being purly political"

I think a Leiberman/MCain ticket would be leading Bush right now by 10 points. Or even a Clark/Leiberman as well.

Besides being a vet Kerry just does not have a strong enough record to beat Bush.

SaburoS · « **Reply #12 on:** August 28, 2004, 03:39:01 PM »

The thing is, once anyone comes into the spotlight, their life comes under a microscope. I'm sure the Republicans could find something to attack no matter the candidate.

Kerry doesn't have a strong enough record as a Senator to beat Bush.

Compare Bush's record as Governor and Kerry's record as Senator and tell me there's a big difference.

Edit... You're right about the Republicans wanting to go against Dean. Bush would probably win that one no problem.

Gunslinger · « **Reply #13 on:** August 28, 2004, 03:49:10 PM »

I am in total agreement with ya!

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #14 on:** August 28, 2004, 03:50:06 PM »

Bush was a govcernor for 4 years, his first term in office IIRC so he a noob. On top of that the lefties say he is kinda slow so his poor performance may be undertandable by those two elements.

Kerry was senator for 20 years, not a noob in any way, many terms. The lefties also say that Kerry is smart and undersatands complexity. So whats his excuse for a pointless 20 year record?