Could It Be That Election Might Be A GWB Landslide?

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Eightball, Oct 13, 2004.

  1. Eightball
    Offline

    Eightball Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    1,359
    Thanks Received:
    252
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +252
    Could the media be just hyping things to make it seem closer than it really is? Afterall, aren't all Demos.
    their "poster boys/girls"?

    Well, maybe not a landslide, but a clear GWB lead ala Bush41/Dukakis?

    Regards, Eightball

    "When we worship intellect, we defecate on common sense."
     
  2. dmp
    Offline

    dmp Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    13,088
    Thanks Received:
    741
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Enterprise, Alabama
    Ratings:
    +741
    It may help ya - go to USER CP on the upper left of your screen; select 'signature' and put your quote there...you won't have to keep re-typing it :)

    :D

    And about the election? I doubt landslide...I 'pray' closer than the last election was.
     
  3. phadras
    Offline

    phadras Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2004
    Messages:
    270
    Thanks Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +17
    sense.. I personaly think that the media and certain pollsters are coming up with skewed polls and results.. The idea being if near the election sKerry is up in the polls it could discourage Repubs from voting as the race is "lost"..



    Normally I view pre-election polls with a grain of salt.. It depends on the sampling and the framing of the questions... But this year is particularly suspect as various polls have jerked up and down too much to truly represent a good sampling...


    I think there is more support for the President than these polls indicate..
    Many new registered voters across the country would not be on the pollsters sampling lists and thus unaccounted for in polling...


    It's constantly stated (yakked at by the talkin' heads who know nothing themselves) that a re-election of a President is more a referrendum on the incumbent.. I believe here they are incorrect.. Due to the nature of the National Security threat we are under the challenger must demonstrate that he will offer more security than the current President..


    IMHO Kerry has clearly shown that he will not offer a safer security situation which leads me to think more folks will switch their votes to Bush in the voting booth rather than Kerry. I'd say a 4-7% shift to Bush..


    Regardless it will be facinating to watch people possibly vote for a candidate in Kerry that would obviously lessen National Security.. Those folks will have to answer should Sen. Lurch win... Because he would very shortly be tested by the terrorists in an attack....
     
  4. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    I wouldn't put it past em. A tight election gets em more money.

    Remember " DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN " ?
     
  5. acludem
    Offline

    acludem VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,500
    Thanks Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    71
    Location:
    Missouri
    Ratings:
    +69
    This election will be as close if not closer than 2000. There will be no landslide here.

    acludem
     
  6. MJDuncan1982
    Offline

    MJDuncan1982 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Messages:
    506
    Thanks Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Mississippi
    Ratings:
    +25
    I agree. This is going to get uglier than 2000. Who knows when we will know for sure who is President.

    I don't think there's a media conspiracy though - I thought us libs only came up with conspiracise! :dunno:
     
  7. 5stringJeff
    Offline

    5stringJeff Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,990
    Thanks Received:
    536
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Ratings:
    +540
    I disagree. I call Bush 51-48.
     
  8. MJDuncan1982
    Offline

    MJDuncan1982 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Messages:
    506
    Thanks Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Mississippi
    Ratings:
    +25
    51-48 what? Popular vote? That doesn't matter remember.

    All of the states that supposedly 'matter' are statistically dead even. We'll have to recount each one of those states. There's a good chance about 60 electoral votes will be unknown for a long while so unless either candidates absolutely wipes the other one out (unlikely), we are in for a debacle.
     
  9. phadras
    Offline

    phadras Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2004
    Messages:
    270
    Thanks Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +17
    that went for AlGore are now in play. States in play with electoral vote Wisconsin-11,Vermont-3,Pennsylvania-23, New Jersey-15,Michigan-18, and Iowa-7,... The overall popular vote will not be as close, and the subsequent electoral college would be heavier in favor of Bush... Bush had 271 in 2000, He could add these states and get to 348.. Even if Bush were to lose Ohio, which he won in 2000, he could still have 328.. Amount to Elect is 270 of course..
     
  10. rtwngAvngr
    Offline

    rtwngAvngr Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    15,755
    Thanks Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +511
    I want to go into a deep freeze and wake up sometime in february. I can't take anymore!


    AHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAA!
     

Share This Page