An Orwellian Moment in Time: Bush's Poll Numbers Rising -- Why?

[tom_paine]

I'm sure we've all taken notice of the recent "rise" in Bunnypants' poll numbers lately. As with so many Soviet Moments we have experienced in Imperial Amerika since the Busheviks put their boot upon our necks.

Once again Up is Down and 1 + 1 = 3. I contrast Clarke with Ollie North and I wonder. In 1987, what was clearly a Bushevik Feasability Study in Pereception Managment and Soviet-level Lies, where Ollie was said to have a 95% approval rating (which we now know was a lie and a "Freeped Poll" to say the least, if there even WAS such a poll or more likely it was just a BIG LIE repeated to a gullible populace).

Now Clarke appears. Whatever he may be, he certainly comes of as honest and concerned as well as a True Patriot. A Registered Republican who served both parties equally. To my mind, anyone with a shred of humanity remaining and a shred of critical thought process unerased by Corporate TV Pravda and the Party-Loyal Right-Wing Sub-Media cannot fail to be at least a little moved by his testimony.

And yet, Bush's polls are moving upwards!

Why? I would like to get a sense of where DUers stand on the "why"?

Please feel free to add any thoughts, criticisms or flames, as well as anything I missed.

[BabsSong]

1. First, once we had a nominee, the nominee's numbers will drop

It always happens. People like the idea of someone else but when that someone else is finally chosen they say "is that all??" Then the candidate has to start at that point and get the people charged up again for him. Secondly, just like dragging plastic turkey's around are good for a bounce, so are the ads against Kerry. The average American says "Good Jesus Mary, Kerry is going to raise taxes 900 billion dollars and so he's going to take all my money". Right now we are kind of at a real disadvantage until Kerry raises a lot of money and starts ads. I suggest he doesn't try to answer Bush in ads but needs to come out swining at him. And not rely on the "this is my plan" stuff because nobody listens anyhow.

[tom_paine]

3. I hope you're right, Babs

You're vision assumes a Strong and Healthy Republic with trustworthy voting system.

I hope you're right.

Also, you are correct ion that the science of Marketing has taken Lie Coordination and Targeted Psychomanipulation to levels we cannot even conceive of nowadays.

Also, I am of the belief that AT MINIMUM the Busheviks have a Dirty Tricks Program that makes Watergate look lik some kids with marbles.

But even that wouldn't be enough to destroy us if we had a Free Press and trustworthy voting systems.

I pray you are right and that it is still a mere matter of "politics" the way we remember during the Days of the Old Republic.

[DemNoir]

2. Here is a far-out concept

Maybe its just one atypical poll 7 months out from the election and really means nothing in the scheme of things

I hate to stick a pin in the balloon of panic, just a thought.

[tom_paine]

4. No no, please stick all the pins in the balloon of panic that you wish!

However, most if not all polls are showing this trend, so I am not just looking at a single poll, but the whole cluster of them.

I do agree that it's 7 months until election and these polls are in many ways meaningless.

What I am asking about is the TREND and how Soviet it seems compared to the reality.

[DemNoir]

10. At this point

Does a National poll mean all that much? The election is sure to be close
state by state polls are probably all that really matter.

[tom_paine]

15. The National Polls mean something because they are the Pravda

the Busheviks use to give credibility to the lie, fraud, theft du jour.

As polls, they are worthless. Even if they were trustworthy, you are correct in that the "election" is a long ways off.

But they represent the Busheviks telegraphing their punches.

To wit: When the spate of polls came out showing Kerry with a 5-7% lead across the board, in what has become a disturbing Soviet Pattern, a Bushevik-controlled organization issues a contradictory poll to give cover to themselves, saying (at the time and contradicting the other polls) that Bush and Kerry were tied.

I challenge you, now that a spate of polls have come out showing Bush and Kerry are tied, to find the contradictory poll showing Kerry with a lead of 5-7%.

Interesting, isn't it? I have gotten more lessons in Kremlinology living in the Empire in the last 4 years than I could have gotten from a lifetime of book-study. Though I would rather not have gained this knowledge, if you know what I mean.

Think about what I have said about the poll pattern. Watch for it, should Kerry once again be ahead in the polls by 5-7%.

[nolabels]

43. "I would rather not have gained this knowledge, if you know what I mean"

Come on Tom, you started this poll, don't you remember. The truth will set you free :scared:

Really though, Other here and I don't believe a damn word, it is just interesting to see what one could see.

Most of the effing dudes and dudettes parading in front of the screen are avowed liars, so cross checking, reading between the lines and looking at the results and evidence at hand serves to give me the best view.

If everybody was led by polls, we would all be having club fights over who gets the best cave.

[calimary]

34. Truly. Please do it! Because I AM panicking...

WOW. What a difference a few days make (makes?).

I'm so upset, I'm even forgetting my grammar.

Shit. The polls just disgust me. The responses of Americans that are shown in those polls - disgust me. The gullibility and denial of Americans - disgust me. YES I know it's early. YES I know the fat lady hasn't sung. YES I know anything can happen. But SHIT, if the Richard Clarke Show all last week didn't have any impact, then I'm frankly considering leaving the country. I DO NOT want to live in an America that's ruled by the bushies for another 4 years. Don't know that I realistically can do this. But now, I'm wanting to.

I'm giving to the Kerry campaign til I'm scraping bottom. I'm giving to MoveOn.org. I'm even giving to the DLC, for heaven's sakes! I'm faxing, emailing, calling, writing. Exhorting everyone else I see to do the same. Buying not one but TWO copies of the Richard Clarke book (yes, our little local bookstore still had some, after selling out the first load). And it seems to be doing no good. And YES I know it's early.

I am more disheartened this morning than I've been in a long time. I yearn for more people to stick pins in the balloon of MY personal panic. It may be the only thing that keeps me from sobbing, today.

[i_c_a_White_Ghost]

5. All this talk on national security

fits into the hands of the repubs, but he's taken a hit! Still his numbers are better then Kerry's because America thinks Bush is still a strong leader. Of course it's bull, but it temporarily lifts his poll ratings. If you look inside the numbers they are not as good for Shrub!

[tom_paine]

8. His numbers still AREN'T ahead of Kerry

He has moved from being consitently behind to a statistical dead heat.

Hitler and Stalin were strong leaders. As were Ferdinand Marcos, Idi Amin, Papa Doc, and other leaders who resemble Bush.

(Thank God for the Constitution, Bill of Rights and a heavily armed populace that keps them from accelerating the plan to where Comrade Putin has advanced the Bushevik Kampf on those poor Russians)

[lectrobyte]

13. This morning, I must have heard on 3 TV Stations, and NPR even,

about Kerry raising taxes 350 times. MSNBC even showed a clip of a republican commercial that I thought was pretty well done, for propaganda. With this onslaught, I can understand why numbers would be the way they are, especially given the "tax and spend" bs I hear from my various co-workers etc.

We need to attack on the economy, jobs, and credibility of the current resident, and hit hard.

[tom_paine]

16. Sure, Corporate Pravda (of which NPR is a part) passes on Bushevik Lies

without checking them because they are afraid to have the Blast Trumpets of the Party-Loyal Bushevik Sub-Media turned on them.

Yes, the entire spectrum of Corporate TV Pravda continues to give the Imperials free aid in disseminating lies.

What good does it do to "attack" Bunnypants if they are permitted to lie without end, and not only allowed to get away with it, but will have that lie amplified and laundered by Corporate TV Pravda (wouldn't want to be accused of being "liberal media" now would we)before breakfast.

A Free Nation cannot long remain Free without a Free Press. As Imperial Amerika is no longer technically free, with many others shoes left to drop, I think this assertion has been validated.

[nolabels]

44. Really this is the only thing they can use..............

but they have laid most of the bank on it. Make no mistake, they hope to stifle any information that contradicts the (dis)information they are putting out. I am quite sure they are MORE afraid of the truth getting out than most Red Blooded Patriots

As far I can see, mostly all the things are interrelated when it comes to what is being done to screw everybody (except the ones that are not part of the super-rich, of course). I kind of don't think that a lot of people are seeing that yet. How to boil a frog was not learned overnight. Lots of shady deals have went down through the ages. Some never even get noticed but this one has been plotted and built up through the years.

These SOB's seem to be planing a time darker than that of the Guilded Age but their problem is we also see them coming



http://www.history.ohio-state.edu/projects/uscartoons/1900Campaign.htm

[spanone]

49. Which begs the question...Where are the democrats?????

Is there no one other than the candidate to refute this utter BS?????? When is THE PARTY going to bat for Kerry????

[tom_paine]

50. EXCELLENT POINT! WHERE ARE THEY?!?

:wtf:

I mean, I understand the politics of Kerry staying out of the news while the commission is going on but does that really extend to vigoruously debunking Bushevik Lies?

I have a VERY bad feeling about this i the pit of my stomach.

Kerry SAID he was going to aggressively refute lies, but here they are and Kerry is silent.

FULL DISCLOSURE: I am volunteering for the Kerry Campaign and I have sent him $$$

This is still INCREDIBLY DISTRESSING!

[BR_Parkway]

7. Slightly over 1000 people were questioned

Is that a strong statistical sample of the overall population? Could I pick one zip code, known to be blue or red - and get the polls to swing in one direction or the other? Sure, and I'll bet Rove is pulling in some favors to make it look better than it is.

[TomNickell]

6. Likely Voters

The current CNN/Gallup poll--

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/03/29/bush.kerry/index.html

<<Part of the reason for the shift is that a more equal number of Democrats and Republicans now say they are likely to vote this year. In earlier polls taken in the heat of the primary season, Democrats had expressed more enthusiasm about voting than Republicans, which buoyed Kerry's numbers among likely voters.>>

Repubs are mad bacause their guy is being attacked and are telling the pollster they are certain to vote.

Other reasons:

There's a likely rally-round-the-flag effect. The Leader is attacked, some will defend him.

Kerry has been, deliberately, out of the news for 2 weeks. After being the center of attention for months. This has a weird effect on polls.

The analysis in the CNN story--that Bush's ads are biting--is probably bs. They're running in key states, most people haven't seen them.

Bottom line: Bush has likely completely lost the elite media. If we continue to see honest reporting, he is done.

[tom_paine]

11. I don't think Imperial Amerika has yet seen honest reporting (en masse)

other than a few pockets which have been honest from the start.

I agree that if Corporate Pravda began reporting honestly then Bunnypants* would be toast, but as soon as they even try, they Party-Loyal Bushevik Sub-media will wail like a siren 24/7, both to drown out the honest reportage and confuse the issue with the equivalent of Octopus' Black Ink.

In such a climate as we have in the Empire right now, they could successfuly convince 46% of the Imperial Subjects of Amerika that 1 + 1 = 3.

I have yet to see this "honest reporting" we speak of. The Corproate Pravda is still Bush-initmidated and Bush-infiltrated.

[TomNickell]

54. It's all relative....

Compared to the year after 9/11, when only the most gushing admiration was permissible, the last months have been positively 'honest'.

9/11 was a powerfully emotional issue for the American elites. Terrorism is a recurrent fear. If it becomes apparent that Bush screwed everything up, the punditocracy is going to turn very critical. (I know, it was already obvious, but elite pundits are kind of slow.)

And even the Corporate bosses aren't going to support gross incompetence very long. Terrorist attacks are bad for business.

[calimary]

35. That's the problem. bush has NOT lost the elite media.

NOT BY A LONG SHOT.

[Ganja Ninja]

9. Let me just make a couple of predictions right now...

Bush will never fall behind by more than ten points. No matter what the pollsters won't let that happen.

Bush will pull ahead two weeks before election day and it will be an even race on the eve of the election.

[tom_paine]

12. Isn't it easy to make predictions in a Totalitarian Nation like Imperial

Amerika?

I'd gladly trade being wrong more often for my National Freedom back.

You are correct, sir, but that is like predicting in 1935 that Stalin was going to hunt down and kill Trostky, and that the Soviet media would erase him from history afterwards.

Not to belittle our collective predictive powers, but predicting what a Stalin or a Bush would do is no great feat.

[Quahog]

14. It's March

I keep reminding myself that we've got a long hot summer to get through before 90% of Americans start paying serious attention to any of this. Yeah, bushCo's anti-Kerry ads have caused an increase in Kerry's unfavorable ratings, because for most people the ads are the ONLY input they've had about Kerry. We've got a LONG way to go folks.

Two things do bother me. First, the Kerry campaign is letting bushCo lead the effort to define Kerry as a candidate. Second, the whole campaign is already going negative in an ugly way. Kerry's team will have to strike back, and since they've obviously decided to reject the Clinton team's MO of countering bullshit charges loudly and immediately, it must be that they're planning some big smear campaign based on the monkey's record somewhere down the road. This plays into the hands of the rethugs, who will go out and vote for their boy no matter what, while many Dems and independents will be disgusted by the tone of the whole campaign and just stay home on election day. Low voter turnout always favors the true believers of the new right.

[spotbird]

17. Why copy Clinton, just because it was a working strategy?

And maybe the Bush definition of Kerry will improve over time.

[tom_paine]

18. Touche, spotbird. Touche.

This is something that should concern us all.

[calimary]

37. I wonder if Donna Brazile is working for Kerry.

That'll guarantee a bush win. She is as much a fighter as the butterfly out there on my lavender plant.

[tom_paine]

51. You bring up a good point: Bushevik Moles

Either Gore and Kerry have the weakest campaign staffs ever, or teher are Luci the Bat type moles at the highest levels, whispering poison in Kerry's ear.

How can he NOT be aggressively debunking these charges?

[frank frankly]

19. we might be fucked, but there is no quitting in me...yet.

they are pharoahs trying to bury us in the tomb. the earth is there tomb. they will turn this place into their hell, unless they are stopped.

it is up to the good hats at the CIA to save us. simple as that.

our populace is completely brainwashed. no human is immune to propaganda and we are at an incredible state of propaganda. ALL television is propaganda. the news is pravda. infotainment in and of itself is reality-washing.

bush should have lost 5 points this week and never gotten them back. even if the polls are rigged, which is likely, we are fucked either way. i see NO urgency in the eyes of my fellow citizens. the few that grasp the geopolitical reality of what is happening...well, we talk about canada a lot. if bush steals it, i won't be staying. i've read about siberia. i've worked in a mental hospital. they would put me there or there or the gallows.

very discouraging. clarke was effectively smeared. unbelievable.

not a good sign.

[tom_paine]

20. No quitting in me either, pal.

And yes, if the Busheviks finish the transformation of what they've begun, people like you and me are dead.

Or, as you aptly pointed out, the Busheviks having such similarity to the Bolsheviks, drugged to the gills in a Mental Facility, 2/3rds nuts and 1/3rd political prisoners.

But there's no giving up! Not if you love Liberty and loathe Tyranny.

[calimary]

38. I'm not giving up, either. But I'm just FILLED with dread.

Nothing I'M doing seems to be helping...

[FreeSpeechCrusader]

24. There seems to be no

major concern of whether Bush did his job or not...basically it seem that the American people are saying: "Well, I don't really give a shit if the President does his job or not because he seems like a nice guy." It makes me utterly disgusted. How can the populace ignore Clarke,a man that has been in more republican administrations than he has democratic.

I saw a California congresswoman on CNN American Morning, and she was stating of how the Bush admin. was cherrypicking what the CIA was going to declassify and stating how it was a violation of government policy. And all that Bill Hemmer could say is, "But what if those documents don't need to be released based on national security." Duh...that is why the CIA was going to review them. It is complete bullshit. You would think that the news stations would want to pick up and run with some of these stories...but they all fear that the corporate owners of the media will lynch them if they deviate from the plan. almost all of today's journalists apparently has absolutely no integrity...it is sickening.

[ProfessorGAC]

21. All The Polls Don't Show This

Some of the polls, (Pew, ARI, OORC) show the numbers within the statistical bounds of the sample size. So, they don't all show a bounce.

Secondly, some of what passes for approval polls have actually been "Did the Clarke testimony change your opinion?" polls. If you were asked that question, wouldn't you say "No"? That being the case, the media then runs with the story that the Clarke stuff did not hurt the president. It's a misinterpretation of those polls.

So, don't panic. The attack ads, the bounds of statistical confidence, and the misinterpretation of some results all indicate that it's too soon to indicate a trend of any kind.
The Professor

[mrdmk]

22. Something else to add

The media does things for the corporations. "Why", one may ask? The media is a corporation. Any notion that the media is going to do something for the public rather than the corporation is in for a rude awaking.

[tom_paine]

29. Given that, my response is thus:

I would say then that the overall media concentration (i.e. fewer corporations) as well as the sea change in corporate/TV mores that forced news to become a profit-driven institution (it was not always thus) as opposed to an acceptable money-loser (acceptable because apparently the men ho beat Hitler recognized that reliable media was the hallmark of a Free Nation).

Given those two changes, it is no surprise that Corporate now has a many-times magnified power/control effect on the media relative to the Height of the Old American Republic.

While your overall point is partially correct, sir, the fact that in the Old Republic Corporations accepted the fact that news was a money-loser, but a necessary service, undercuts how your point is only "partially correct".

It is the mores of the Corporations that has changed.

[mrdmk]

55. Yes and No

Not all news broadcast here in Los Angeles are money losers by any means. As a matter of fact a lot of people do watch the news. The lowest rated evening news among the networks is CBS. CBS evening news on any given has 5 million plus viewers. That is the lowest among the networks. Fox News Service O'Reiley has in the neighborhood of 2 million viewers on any given night. The news service is much cheaper to run than in the late 1970's and early 1980's with real time satellite (around the world), and now with digital technology becoming so cheap it is not funny. The cameras in the studio (usually 3 or 4) are ran remote control by one person. There used to be people behind those cameras at $60,000 per year. This is corporate news.

Besides, most of these corporations are in other business. To support these other business they have been known to run a piece on their newscast. Unfair as that might be, it does happen. The major corporate profits are up 28% (?) this year and employed 20% or less of the U.S. population.

Now argue this one, when the F.C.C. was raising the caps of 35% of the viewing population to 45% viewing population there was a news black-out by the corporate news service. Not because they were losing money, but because these people could make more money. The point being they will bend our information to their liking and nothing less.

[tom_paine]

25. As always, words of wisdom, Professor

And I am not panicking. Just noting one in a long line of "Orwellian Moments" since the Bush Family took over our nation.

No panic here, pal, just pure'd PISSED OFF MOTIVATION!

[ProfessorGAC]

26. Completely Understandable. Completely Understood

I share your sentiments, tom_paine.
The Professor

[RichM]

23. I have to congratulate you on this line, tom -

..In ...what was clearly a Bushevik Feasability Study in Pereception Managment and Soviet-level Lies... -

I really got a chuckle out of reading that!

[tom_paine]

32. And this from a Comrade!

Thanks, Rich...

Didn't whether you guys had any tolerance for points made at the expense of the Old USSR.

Color me pleasantly surprised.

Hope you and the missus are doing well.

[cheezus]

27. $20mil attacking Kerry is making a dent

Most people see tv ads, but I'm guessing that most people haven't been following the 9/11 hearings. Things will turn around when the commision comes out with their report.

[rucky]

28. #3 - Most Americans suck.

I'm starting to give less of a shit about what happens to this country anymore.

[tom_paine]

30. DON'T GIVE UP!

And I think you better get your checkbook out (if you have the $$$) and donate to Kerry or (if you don't have the $$$ and maybe even if you do) get out and work for him!

Absent these things, you have NO LEG TO STAND ON to criticize your fellow Americans in this regard.

Not to be a jerk, but what have YOU done to help end the Bushevik Tyranny before it comes to full fruition?

[calimary]

40. Already did this. For the THIRD time. JUST THIS MORNING.

I did it. And I'm NOT giving up. And I KNOW it's early in the game. But my heart is just BEYOND heavy...

[KansDem]

31. Bush was ahead by several points leading up to the 2000 election.

But Gore won...both the popular vote AND electoral college.

It was believed that Gore might win the electoral college and take the White House over Bush's popular win. It was then that Sleazy Tweety wrote his column about how if this happened, Gore should concede his win to Bush, the "popular vote getter." But when the opposite happened, Tweety said nothing about Bush's need to concede his electoral college "win" to Gore's popular victory.

All through Campaign2000, I suspected that the Media was corrupt, but that incident cemented it for me.

From then on:
"Fourth Estate" became the "Whoreth Estate"
CBS = "Cock and Bull Story"
ABC = "Another Bullshit(ing) Corporation"
FOX = "Full Of Xhit!"
NPR = "News Prostitutes for Republicans" or "New Presstitutes for Republicans"
CNN = "Crap and Noxious News"
(I haven't thought of one for NBC, yet)

[Arugula Latte]

36. NBC =

Nonstop Bias Corp. (well, it's not great, but all I could come up with on the spot.)

[tom_paine]

41. What started me thinking down that road...

I sat and watched the 1st pResidential Debate in 2000.

From a strictly technical standpoint, Gore destroyed Bush. Forced him to come up speechless a couple times. Tagged him with Karl Rove's statement about how a $15,000,000,000,000 debt to service was OK by him. Several times made cogent points Bush was unable to reply to and forced him to reterat to his "Fuzzy Math" parroting, which sounded both foolish and weak at the same time.

Yes, Gore sighed, and that cannot be denied.

However, he still CRUSHED him in the debates. And this from the guy (me) who scored the 1988 pResidential Debate as a crushing victory for Poppy Bush, objectively speaking.

Of course, imagine my surprise when the pean across all of Corporate TV Pravda the next day was not a tie but BUSHWONBUSHWONBUSHWON!

That was the first time I felt what I call the Soviet Chill up my spine. It took me awhile to identify it, but it was a feeling indistinguishable from that which I felt during reading "Animal Farm", you know where Comnrade Napoleon unleashes the now-grown Dogs. Where the sheep bleat "Four Legs Good! Two Legs Bad!" to drown out any discussion.

The Attempted Coup of 1998 felt Imperial Roman, and sent THAT kind of chill up my spine, but the Soviet Chill is infintely worse and more scary than any Roman Chill.

Oh, and my first experience with Poll Freeping (this MUST have been done by a Freeper Excite.com employee and how deep does that Pravda effort go?) was when I checked into a new Excite.com poll.

It was literally minutes old. The question was "Do you have a favorable opinion of Al Gore?"

The Results:

Yes 3 0%
No 40001 99.9%

If I had been more Bushevik Savvy I would have screen captured and sent it to excite.com, but like so many I never realized the extent to which anti-American Bushevik forces had parasitized so many aspect of our nation.

But I know now. I know now.

[Blue_Roses]

33. thinking the same

thing. His numbers improve as he is being questioned for credibility and competence (Bush). It's just too "coincidental."

[Snivi Yllom]

39. Other: Bush ads have been effective.

[LeahMira]

42. Depends on a lot of things...

... like how the poll was conducted, how the questions are phrased, how large a sample was polled, etc. Really, pollsters can get just about any response they want if they want a particular result. Who's conducting these polls?

I also think that as people who are vitally concerned about politics we make the mistake of thinking that everyone else is as concerned and interested as we are. We like to reassure ourselves of the power of a few dedicated individuals, so at some level we understand that we are few, but at the same time we don't really understand it. I think that unless something happens that is sensational (in any way, whether it's Clinton's penis or 9/11... just sensational) most people really pay very little attention to things that we think are important.

I don't think that's good, but I think that's the way it is. I also think that people will vote for the person they think is going to win. It's like some horse race where everyone wants to pick the winner. Sometimes, the people who are taking the polls are seriously aware of that fact and anxious to make sure their candidate is perceived as the guy who's going to win.

[rogue11]

45. Explanation: it's the economy, stupid

It's the economy, stupid.

Until a few weeks ago, everybody was talking about the economy. Bush's poll numbers steadily sunk. Kerry's numbers steadily rose.

Now for a week or two everybody has been talking about 9/11 and what Bush knew. Bush's numbers have gone up. Kerry's numbers have gone down.

You can't argue with irrational people, and that's what most Americans are. They think the Republicans are the best on foreign policy and defending the country. So whenever the media and everybody make this the discussion topic, independent voters are going to start favoring Bush.

But when the economy comes up in discussion, voters naturally start siding with Kerry. Just look at the current Bush recession. Outsourcing. Tax breaks for the rich. Plutocracy. People are sick of it.

Take this advice: keep the discussion topic on the economy, and keep the topic off foriegn policy.

It's the economy, stupid.

[SoCalDem]

46. Polls say what the poll takers NEED for them to say

:)

[SoCalDem]

47. In order for the BBV "fix" to work, the race MUST be close

So the polls will always show them to be within a few points.. That way on election night when a few key states have their "numbers worked", Bush will win..and the people will shrug and say.. "Well it WAS close"...

They have been fine-tuning their strategy since 2000 and Georgia was the test case.. It worked..

Unless there is OVERWHELMING protest..IN THE STREETS..that cannot be ignored...and OVERWHELMING turnout at the polls (documented by videos) and maybe even signed affadavits, Bush WILL win...

This is a life or death election, and they have NO intention to turning over all the nifty little powers they have given themselves..to ANY democrat..

[tom_paine]

52. Frighteningly enough, I believe you are correct in yuor assessment.

:grr: :grr: :mad: :grr:

[lostnfound]

48. Some, though slowly tiring of Bush, are getting more familiar with Kerry

and are finding stuff not to like.. Such as..If they liked that he was a veteran, they don't like his comments about war crimes in Vietnam.

Also, Clarke is credible if you hear more than a soundbyte, but many people only get soundbytes. They are left with just a vague impression of disloyalty of Clarke (because they are uninformed).

[shoopnyc123]

53. Don't trust the polls.

This is pure, "do it over again" polling. AND the dates for these polls are way behind recent events. WE KNOW ABOUT IT, but the general populace does not. They will though.

[MinnFats]

56. I was absolutely sure Dubya's numbers would take a hit..

....
especially after the lying-their-asses-off episode re: the lowballed medicare bill, costing, what, $135 billion more than they were willing to admit? Continueing to lie even though they knew their figures were bullshit? Tricking conservative senators into voting for it, when those same senators would never have voted for it if they knew the true cost? Threatening to fire someone because he wanted to speak the truth? (If a Dem president had pulled that, the impeachment resolutions would be through committee and on the House floor by now).

All that before Clarke's damning, damning testimony that confirmed what O'Neil and many others had said previously: That Bush was so obsessed with Iraq and furthering the PNAC agenda that his administration was willing to ignore everything else, including the possibility that lunatic terrorists were on their way to commit the worst killings ever on U.S. soil....

...you think those items would cost you a point or two, wouldn't you?