New York in Play??

[MtnBiker]

September 20, 2004--John Kerry's lead in New York is down to single digits. The Empire State, among the bluest of the Blue States from Election 2000, is still in the Kerry column for our Electoral College projections, but the raw numbers are stunning.

Confirming findings found in other recent polls, Rasmussen Reports shows John Kerry leading George Bush by merely five percentage points, 49% to 44%. Four years ago, Al Gore defeated Bush to carry New York by a 25 point margin. Our last New York survey found Kerry up by 19 points.

Bush is also closer than expected in neighboring New Jersey.

Rudy Giuliani, Mayor of New York on 9/11 and one of the nation's most popular political figures, strongly endorsed the President at the Republican National Convention. That may be connected to the President's rise in the state's Election Polls.

Nearly a quarter of the state's Democrats now say they will vote for Bush.

Forty-seven percent (47%) of New Yorkers now Approve of the President's Job Performance. That's a six-point increase since our last survey in the state

Link

Wow, only 5 points, I was suprised.

 

[krisy]

Link

Wow, only 5 points, I was suprised.

Great news!!! I never thought I would see the day that it was this close in N.Y. and Jersey. I don't doubt that Guliani is helping. Go G.W.!!!

 

[Merlin1047]

Link

Wow, only 5 points, I was suprised.

Although it's difficult, one can still find Democrats with principles in the northeast and eastern seaboard states. With folks like Rudy Guliani, Ed Koch and Joe Lieberman coming out in support of GW, that has to get people thinking. Once libs look past the sound bites and the slogans they find that their candidate doesn't have a clue.

 

[Avatar4321]

Ive thought NY would be in play since 2001. i think Bush will win it. But i dont think the major breaks in favor of the President will be till election week.

 

[eric]

It's great that Bush is moving up here, but it irks me, just how many liberals we really have here. After being directly attacks, one would think security would be in the forefront of most New Yorker's minds, and social issues would take a back seat, but this is just not the case. If it were Bush would be ahead, being there is NO doubt who is better able to keep us safe, or as safe as possible.

 

[nakedemperor]

And people wonder why the first words out of Dubya's mouth in the debate were "September 11th". Its no surprise that New Yorkers and New Jersey residents are leaning more Republican than usual-- they're aching for a unilateral foreign relations cowboy to keep 'em safe for the terrorists. Remember when they beefed up security in the stock exchange and other buildings because of 'recent intelligence' saying the terrorists were scoping them out? Well, 2 weeks later, that beefed up security was GONE. That 2 week window sure was dangerous...

New Yorkers are scared, and the terrorists aren't the only ones to blame =P

 

[eric]

Actually, you are correct. They are terrified Kerry might win, and turn over our national security to the UN !!

 

[MtnBiker]

And people wonder why the first words out of Dubya's mouth in the debate were "September 11th". Its no surprise that New Yorkers and New Jersey residents are leaning more Republican than usual-- they're aching for a unilateral foreign relations cowboy to keep 'em safe for the terrorists. Remember when they beefed up security in the stock exchange and other buildings because of 'recent intelligence' saying the terrorists were scoping them out? Well, 2 weeks later, that beefed up security was GONE. That 2 week window sure was dangerous...

New Yorkers are scared, and the terrorists aren't the only ones to blame =P

Those damn Republicans, whipping up fear and scared emotions on the backs of terrorists just for political gain.

 

[onedomino]

And people wonder why the first words out of Dubya's mouth in the debate were "September 11th". Its no surprise that New Yorkers and New Jersey residents are leaning more Republican than usual-- they're aching for a unilateral foreign relations cowboy to keep 'em safe for the terrorists. Remember when they beefed up security in the stock exchange and other buildings because of 'recent intelligence' saying the terrorists were scoping them out? Well, 2 weeks later, that beefed up security was GONE. That 2 week window sure was dangerous...

New Yorkers are scared, and the terrorists aren't the only ones to blame =P

they're aching for a unilateral foreign relations cowboy to keep 'em safe for the terrorists.

This is almost word for word the description of Bush I heard at dinner in Lyon, France.

That 2 week window sure was dangerous

How would you know? Based on the fact that there was no attack, or that increased security successfully discouraged an attack? Do you have access to national intelligence estimates? Apparently, if you were making the call there would have been no increase in security.

 

[eric]

How would you know? Based on the fact that there was no attack, or that increased security successfully discouraged an attack? Do you have access to national intelligence estimates?

Excellent point !!

 

[tim_duncan2000]

they're aching for a unilateral foreign relations cowboy to keep 'em safe for the terrorists.

As long as unilateral = not including France and Germany.

Remember when they beefed up security in the stock exchange and other buildings because of 'recent intelligence' saying the terrorists were scoping them out? Well, 2 weeks later, that beefed up security was GONE. That 2 week window sure was dangerous...

And then if they did nothing and there was an attack, you'd say "Why wasn't anything being done?"

 

[nakedemperor]

How would you know? Based on the fact that there was no attack, or that increased security successfully discouraged an attack? Do you have access to national intelligence estimates? Apparently, if you were making the call there would have been no increase in security.

Ok, its not a very difficult concept to understand-- 'new' evidence comes to light saying terrorists are casing several important buildings in NYC, e.g. the stock exchange. A significant portion of this data is months, if not years old. In response to this static intelligence, you let the nation know, raise the terror alert, beef up security so you couldn't get an unidentified bobby pin into the building...and then leave 14 days later.

 

[nakedemperor]

And then if they did nothing and there was an attack, you'd say "Why wasn't anything being done?"

Mmm, I was waiting for words to be put into my mouth-- it happens at least once every time I post. I'm all for beefing up security. But when you beef up security for 2 weeks and then assume the threat has passed without any reason to believe it has, well, I'm not for that. If you'd understood the critique I had, it was that they were ONLY there for 2 weeks, not that they shouldn't have been there at all. Do you guys even finish reading my posts? AH! Liberal! We aaaaalll know what HE'S gonna say. Better copy-paste the same stuff I say to all the liberals.

 

[tim_duncan2000]

But when you beef up security for 2 weeks and then assume the threat has passed without any reason to believe it has

How do you know there was no reason to believe that it had passed? I don't think they always make all that information public.

 

[nakedemperor]

How do you know there was no reason to believe that it had passed? I don't think they always make all that information public.

So your logic..

Threat = let everyone know

Threat has passed = don't let everyone know

yes?

 

[tim_duncan2000]

Maybe sometimes it is complicated and they don't want to reveal how exactly they got the information (protecting the source, you know, like what your friends at CBS are doing regarding the forged Bush documents).

 

[no1tovote4]

So your logic..

Threat = let everyone know

Threat has passed = don't let everyone know

yes?

It could be

Threat = let everyone know

Threat has passed = pack up and go, people are smart enough to figure it out from there.

yes?

 

[onedomino]

Ok, its not a very difficult concept to understand-- 'new' evidence comes to light saying terrorists are casing several important buildings in NYC, e.g. the stock exchange. A significant portion of this data is months, if not years old. In response to this static intelligence, you let the nation know, raise the terror alert, beef up security so you couldn't get an unidentified bobby pin into the building...and then leave 14 days later.

--------------------

It is a relief to have a brilliant security anaylst helping us understand terrorist threats. Thank you, nakedemperor.

From another thread, posted by Kathianne: http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12836

London's Dirty-Bomb Plot
British authorities suspect that a cell of Islamic terrorists where trying to harvest radioactive material from smoke detectors
By ADAM ZAGORIN AND ELAINE SHANNON

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101041011-708959,00.html

Sunday, Oct. 03, 2004
When British authorities broke up a cell of suspected Islamic terrorists in August, the arrests sent reverberations across the Atlantic. Among the evidence found with the suspects were reconnaissance reports on major U.S. financial sites—including the New York Stock Exchange and the World Bank in Washington.
But senior U.S. law-enforcement officials tell TIME they are continuing to follow the case closely and are learning even more disturbing details about what the group may have been plotting.
Reports on the British investigation, now circulating among U.S. law-enforcement agencies, assert that the group was trying to construct a crude radiological dirty bomb. The arrests (which followed a yearlong surveillance operation, code-named Operation Spangle) turned up a cache of household smoke detectors, which the British suspect the group wanted to cannibalize for their minute quantities of americium-241, a man-made radioactive chemical.
Officials tell TIME it's extremely unlikely that enough americium could be harvested from smoke detectors to create a device potent enough to inflict radiation sickness, let alone kill people. But others argue that spewing even a small amount of radioactive material into a crowded stadium or subway station could trigger sensitive radiation sensors, incite panic and cause long-lasting contamination.
Law-enforcement officials tell TIME that information from computer files seized with the group revealed plans for specific attacks in London, including "blowing up high-rise buildings housing multinational companies" by driving bomb-laden cars into underground garages. Other targets included the Heathrow Express, a rail line between the airport and London, and an unspecified synagogue. There were also plans for "hijacking a gasoline tanker and smashing it into a building." The British cell leader, Dhiren Barot—a.k.a. Issa al-Hindi—traveled to New York City in early 2001, according to The 9/11 Commission Report, "to case potential economic and 'Jewish' targets." U.S. officials hope to learn from the continuing investigation whether a sleeper cell remained in the U.S. to carry out these missions.


From the Oct. 11, 2004 issue of TIME magazine

 

[nakedemperor]

It could be

Threat = let everyone know

Threat has passed = pack up and go, people are smart enough to figure it out from there.

yes?

Wow. That kind of mentality could lend itself to keeping the public in fear. Weird.

 

[no1tovote4]

Wow. That kind of mentality could lend itself to keeping the public in fear. Weird.

It could also lead to leaders actually giving the benefit of the doubt as to the intelligence of the populace. That might be a shocking concept, but in reality we can simply see the difference as we are not (contrary to popular belief) the stupidest people on the planet.