Kerry loses 6 points to Bush in 24 hours

Discussion in 'Politics' started by jimnyc, Feb 18, 2004.

  1. jimnyc
    Offline

    jimnyc ...

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    10,113
    Thanks Received:
    244
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    New York
    Ratings:
    +246
    Bush 48% Kerry 43%

    February 18, 2004--President George W. Bush now leads Massachusetts Senator John F. Kerry by five points in the latest Rasmussen Reports Presidential Tracking Poll. As of this morning, Bush attracts support from 48% of the nation's likely voters while Kerry is the choice for 43%.

    Today's reading is the largest lead for either candidate since John Kerry became the Democrat's front-runner. For most of February, the two candidates have been essentially even. Three days ago, Kerry assumed a modest lead that now appears to be statistical noise.

    Kerry enjoyed an enormous bounce from positive coverage during the Primary campaign to draw even with Bush. However, in the race for the Democratic nomination, he lost ground among Democrats nationally over the past several days.

    The Rasmussen Reports Presidential Election Survey is updated daily by noon Eastern.

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Presidential_Tracking_Poll.htm
     
  2. OCA
    Offline

    OCA Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2004
    Messages:
    7,014
    Thanks Received:
    223
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Washington D.C.
    Ratings:
    +223
    This is just the beginning of the inevitable. Is there really any sane rational thinking Demo(I know, contradiction in and of itself) out there who actually believes this guy has a chance of beating Bush on merit?
     
  3. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    In the end it will come down to jobs, if the job market does not pick up bush will not get re-elected, national security or no.
     
  4. rtwngAvngr
    Offline

    rtwngAvngr Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    15,755
    Thanks Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +511
    Thinking people always put national security first. Jobs mean squat if we fall as a nation or we lose clout to the extent that all our exports are tariffed out of existence. Then what will happen to our jobs? Democratic thinking only makes sense in the context of ignorance and shortsightedness.
     
  5. winston churchi
    Offline

    winston churchi Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2004
    Messages:
    640
    Thanks Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +9
    Those figures change constantly, I no longer pay attention to polls.
    I can recall a time when President Bush senior was rated very high early in the election year while Bill Clinton was the democratic nominee and come November, President Bush was finished.

    Early in the democratic nominations, Kerry was doing very poorly and suddenly rose.
     
  6. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    :rotflmao:

    speaking of ignorance and shortsightedness.

    national security means squat to a person if they can't find a job to support their family.

    FYI, my analysis had squat to do with any political affiliation, I'm giving you the basic human thought process. People will risk security in order to have economic stability in their familial lives. That is something you cannot change, ever.
     
  7. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4303329/

    Bush team retreats from job-growth forecasts
    Prediction was the work of number-cruncers, White House says

    The Associated Press

    Feb. 18, 2004 WASHINGTON - The White House backed away Wednesday from its own prediction that the economy will add 2.6 million new jobs before the end of this year, saying the forecast was the work of number-crunchers and that President Bush was not a statistician.

    Bush, himself, stopped short of echoing the prediction.

    "I think the economy's growing, and I think it's going to get stronger," said Bush, the nation's first MBA president. He said he was pleased that 366,000 new jobs have been added since August. "But I'm mindful there are still people looking for work, and we've got to continue building on the progress we've made so far."

    The administration's refusal to back its own jobs estimate brought criticism from John Kerry, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination.

    "Now George Bush is saying he's going to create 2.6 million jobs this year alone - and his advisers are saying, 'What, you didn't actually believe that, did you?' Apparently George Bush is the only person left in the country who actually believes the far-fetched promises he's peddling," Kerry said in a statement.

    White House press secretary Scott McClellan, asked repeatedly about the forecast, declined to embrace the prediction which was contained in the annual economic report of the White House Council of Economic Advisers.

    Unemployment and the slow pace of job creation are political liabilities for Bush as he heads into a battle for re-election. Despite strong economic growth, the nation has lost about 2.2 million jobs since he became president.

    The jobs forecast was the second economic flap in recent days for the White House. Last week, Bush was forced to distance himself from White House economist N. Gregory Mankiw's assertion that the loss of U.S. jobs overseas has long-term benefits for the U.S. economy.

    Asked about the 2.6 million jobs forecast, McClellan said, "The president is interested in actual jobs being created rather than economic modeling."

    He quoted Bush as saying, "I'm not a statistician. I'm not a predictor."

    "We are interested in reality," McClellan said

    He said the annual economic report was based on data from about three months ago. Since then, Bush has said that things are improving.

    The issue arose at the White House after Treasury Secretary John W. Snow and Commerce Secretary Don Evans declined to endorse the jobs prediction and said it was based on economic assumptions that have an inherent margin of error. They spoke during a tour through Oregon and Washington to promote the president's economic agenda.

    "The number-crunchers will do their job. The president's job is to make sure we're creating as robust an environment as possible for job-creation," McClellan said. "That's where his focus is."

    "This is economic modeling. ... some have said it would be lower," he said.

    "The president has said he is not a statistician. He is most concerned about whether people are hurting and able to find jobs," McClellan said.

    "The economy is moving in the right direction ... but there is more to do," he said.
     
  8. rtwngAvngr
    Offline

    rtwngAvngr Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    15,755
    Thanks Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +511
    Nope, don't buy it. People think jobs is their number one priority because they can't tangibly fathom not being secure, although 9/11 woke up the non-partisan. As soon as people were invading your neighborhood, you wouldn't care a turd about your job. we take it for granted.
     
  9. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    thats just plain ignorant thinking.

    suffering from a ground invasion is not only seriously unlikely, its near implausible. Of course its not going to be on anyones mind.

    Mark my words, people will consider their jobs and financial stability over national security simply because they already feel secure from invasion. It will be the deciding factor in the election.
     
  10. rtwngAvngr
    Offline

    rtwngAvngr Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    15,755
    Thanks Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +511

    I disagree. I don't believe you would go to work on time if your household is under attack. You're lying now.
    this is still the "it'll never happen" argument. Leaders who think this way are not acceptable. What if i told you on 9/10 that the World Trade Center would be destroyed the next day?
    Oh ok. If you say so.

    Thinking people will never feel secure with leaders who's attitude is "that'll never happen."
     

Share This Page