Mason-Dixon Poll: Bush Leads Kerry In N.C; Edwards On Ticket Makes It Even

"With Edwards on the Democratic ticket, he increases Kerry's support primarily among women (+5%), African-Americans (+7%) and Democrats (+4%) to make the race close.

The poll, conducted May 14 - 17, has a margin of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

Bush Name Recognition:
George W. Bush is more personally popular than John Kerry at present. The President's favorable and unfavorable name recognition is relatively similar to what it was in November 2000 -- just before he won the state by 13 percentage points over Al Gore. This makes it appear that he would remain the favorite to carry North Carolina if Kerry does not choose Edwards as his vice presidential running-mate."

http://www.wral.com/news/3319278/detail.html

you hear that!!! North Carolina is IN PLAY with John Edwards on the ticket. If Bush has to waste resources in NC he's finished!

you have to believe the results would be about the same in Edwards birthstate of South Carolina.

do the right thing Mr. Kerry, pick John Edwards as your VP.

Bush might have to fight it out in the deep south, who would've thunk it?

I've lived here in NC for more than 25 years, and I think that the state is in play. A lot of conservatives are very angry with the Chimp administration. Libertarians have a fairly strong presence here, and always have candidates on the ballot.

I predict that numerous conservatives will vote Libertarian this year in NC. Others will simply stay home. Democrats will turn out in droves. The state could go to Kerry, even if he doesn't pick Edwards as VP, as long as Kerry doesn't pick another northeasterner as VP.

No question.

if another candidate is picked over Edwards. Women were strongly for Edwards in his Senate election, and yes like Clinton he is also a man's man. With the Ticket being Kerry/Edwards and help from General Clark, we will be ok..and Gep. Dean and all the other.

have to vote for a Kerry/Clark ticket. Clark gives the state just what they need since they have a poor economy and tons of military. How does Edwards meet any of those needs? Yes, he may make them feel better but........

I hope you are right! I am in Tennessee and I know TN is for sure up for grabs. The Bush campaign thinks it has TN in the basket, but I know from living in an area that is mostly conservative that the people who normally vote republican are pissed. I have heard several say they voted for Bush in 2000 but would not make that mistake again in 2004! Now, coming from a bunch of conservatives that is *BIG*. TN was mostly voting "against" Gore more than they were actually voting "for" Bush. They felt Gore had lost contact and didn't care too much for his homestate. I KNOW Tennessee is up for grabs in 2004. I'm doing everything I possibly can to see that Kerry wins here. GO NORTH CAROLINA - - ya'll can do it too!!!

but I do see lots of signs ....you might be right!!I feel it too.....
And Knoxville is so ultra-red conservative, it is so encouraging to see the yard signs and bumper stickers....(People are disgusted and will sit this one out.)

it is definitely possible that N.C. could be in play, but only if a popular southerner like Edwards or Clark runs as VP and can bring in the swing voters and disgruntled Repubs. The job losses have been staggering in parts of N.C. and S.C. where prominent long established companies have been shutting down to move to Mexico.

But the NRA gun lobby and the Baptists and fundamentalist churches will be working overtime to spread their fear and distortion campaign against Kerry as they did against Gore. It amazes me how so many people don't realize they are being exploited and duped to vote Republican just based on the guns or abortion (and now gay marriage) issues. If it weren't for major church propaganda (including phone banking and printed literature they pass out against Democratic candidates), Kerry would have a much better chance.

When I first moved to N.C. almost 30 years ago, I was asked by two local Baptist-raised coworkers I befriended if Catholics were Christians! (as opposed to heathen idol worshippers I guess) Both of them are now close friends and staunch well-informed Democrats I am glad to say. But the elderly mom of one friend said she was afraid to vote for Kerry because he was involved in a sex scandal like Clinton! It's hard to defend against the Bush smear attacks.

Our local paper ran this front-page article today:

http://cgi.citizen-times.com/cgi-bin/story/news/55071

BY KERRY. at the very least it would get republicans to spend money in a state which democrats already don't plan to win.

that at least one of the Carolinas is in play. The African American populations (the blue streak through S. Carolina) will be energized and mobilized in large numbers, and the job losses in the industrial/rural sectors among the working class Red voters have been horrendous, with little but gentle yabbering from the free marketeers. the fact that they are now crowing about an improving economy while these once well-off industrial Republicans struggle with car payments and watch their factories systematically disassembled is not going to go down well. Abandoned by their heroes, they may just turn.

In years to come... It took a long time to get the south to go republican, and it will take a long time for them to go back to the party that is actually for their best intrest...George Bush is probably the best help the democrats are going to have to get the south back where they belong. The south might realize a better standard of living is more for then than following some one because they claim to be the Christian party.

To: AntiGuv
Not good; Bush won NC 56% to 43% in 2000... and Mason-Dixon is a good polling outfit.



5 posted on 05/18/2004 10:15:34 PM PDT by ambrose

Holy Schnikies...look at the black sheeple...88% to 5%. Talk about a demographic group in the bag. Is Kerry running the Byrd dragging & hate crime ads?



6 posted on 05/18/2004 10:20:29 PM PDT by Archie Bunker on steroids

player (1968 Tigers), and those ads about a murderer with the same name have eclipsed a great man's career.

Assholes. Every time I say a prayer, I also send a curse out after Lee Atwater.

+ John Edwards..Many republicans will stay home and just not vote.Republicans are angry with Bush, they aren't defending him some saying they won't vote for him. Many of the old hard shell republicans,children and grandchildren are without jobs, health care and the list goes on. And it could be there are some that are seeing through the religious stuff... I could be wrong,but I think North Carolina is going democratic.

Don't want readers to misunderestimate us and assume that NC is a Repug bastion....

With the exception of presidential elections, NC is historically Dem or pretty evenly split.

US House generally right around 50/50

US Senate vacillates- We had Helms since '72 but after East died, Sanford (D) 86-92, then Faircloth (R), now Edwards, next probably Bowles.

Only 2 R Gov's in the past 35-40 yrs- Holshouser (72-76) and Martin (84-92).

State Lege is historically D, balance has become much closer to 50/50 over the past 10 yrs (damn snowbirds!)

ON EDIT: As to the meat of your post, I'm in total agreement- but I've gotta chime in with a couple additional HUUUUGE motivations here- Ft. Bragg, Lejeune, Johnson AFB, Pope AFB, MCAS Cherry Point, 3 or 4 VA hospitals (read: mil retirees), the large number of North Carolinians in active service and the Guard... around here, we take care of our boys & girls in uniform. And *'s screwup re: tobacco buyouts didn't help him any, either.

Also agreed that Edwards would lock up NC. Kerry could play smart, pick Edwards, bust the Solid South and + 15 electoral votes in one fell swoop... IMHO, of course.

gone republican, with the state angry with Bush over tobacco, the east will probably go democratic. Bush lost his popularity with the democrats in the state and Elizabeth Dole hitched her wagon to Bush,and with the tobacco thing, this could help Bowles.

The high-tech and biotech opportunities have attracted a lot of blue-state people to the Raleigh-Durham area.

Did a little reading on the DU's Campaign Underground... I had no idea that Charlotte and the surrounding area (8th and 9th districts) went so solidly Republican in '02. Sue Myrick won the 9th in a landslide, and Robin Hayes won the 8th by 9 points. I'm also surprised that the seacoast (3rd district) is such solid GOP country as well.

Can any North Carolinians lend some perspective to a Northern Yankee like me?

-MR

Charlotte area is historically... uh... pro-business. Textiles, furniture, food in particular. So think: regulation, free trade, labor, environment- these are just a few areas in which Dems/the Left have been pounded into the dirt for the past, what, 50 years?

Coast is heavily populated by a) military, b) retirees and c) military retirees. Just because our snowbirds often hail from blue states doesn't mean they're not heavily R-- additionally, many of the professionals you reference are some high-paid mofo's... a perennial GOP demographic. In fact, the political shift from solid D to R-leaning tracks almost exactly with the influx of "immigrants" over the past couple decades. Coincidence?

" Ft. Bragg, Lejeune, Johnson AFB, Pope AFB, MCAS Cherry Point, 3 or 4 VA hospitals (read: mil retirees), the large number of North Carolinians in active service and the Guard... around here, we take care of our boys & girls in uniform."

With all that military...why wouldn't CLARK do better in NC than Edwards? Wouldn't the military feel more secure in Clark's hands (who didn't approve of the war) than Edwards? (who approved of the war and still does)

When NCians get to know CLARK...more of them would vote Dem. than they would for Edwards.

Personally, unless you can back it up with facts, I don't buy it.

But to answer the question, probably because of the home state advantage-- it's generally expected for a national candidate to carry his home state. Remember the big deal about Gore not carrying TN (regardless of reason)?

Additionally, mainstream folks here have a hard time finding fault with many/most of what they perceive to be his moderate, populist views.

http://www.mason-dixon.com/news_text.cfm?news_id=193

where did the military background get Clark in South Carolina?

I just saw the headline but if W can't hold on (90+%) of THEM he is in huge trouble.

Even with Fla. if Va. (or NC) had gone to Gore in 2000 he would have outright won it*.

*not that he didn't anyway.

If they will go Demo. because of the economy...they would also do so if Clark were on the ticket. Clark is probably more knowledgeable on economics than Edwards. Being a good trial lawyer doesn't make one an economist. They would also be more likely to vote for Clark because of his military credentials.

If Clark were on the ticket...they would vote for him when they got to know him. They just know more about Edwards now.

Was any other potential VP candidate included in the questioning?

What WAS the question asked?

Who was polled and how many?

Looked briefly on the Mason-Dixon website but found no answers.

Will look again.

None of the above questions were answered... unless I missed it, in which case I accept a :dunce: and apologise.

There IS a quote from MasonDixon Polling's managing director Mr. Coker "I would think that it (the poll) will create a little bit of a buzz for him (Edwards)"

Perhaps Edwards has a group paying for this poll and is doing it to create a "buzz" and an appearance of some groundswell of avid grassroots support which HE NEVER HAD DURING THE PRIMARIES.

of the article you cite with the Coker quote:

"The Winston-Salem Journal and several other news organizations paid Mason-Dixon to conduct its poll."

http://www.mason-dixon.com/news_text.cfm?news_id=193

still unanwered.

And I wonder which other news organizations... I see CNN associates give Mason Dixon glowing recommendations.

And to elaborate on my One And Only answer, since it was the WRAL-MD poll, I'd guess WRAL also contributed.

Presumably (and no evidence to support it, but that's how it usually works), since the questions seem to pertain specifically to how NC would vote, and the respondents were NC'ians... I'm guessing that it's primarily the major NC news outlets... which might also explain the Edwards angle. Would also like to see the questions/data which led the WS paper to state that Edwards beat out the other named VP candidates like Graham-F...

Nice attempt to tar M-D with the CNN brush, btw. Apparently, the Nat'l Council on Public Polls thinks pretty highly of 'em, too.




FCOL, it's a statewide poll conducted in mid-May, not the end of the world.

concluding the same thing for your theory to be compelling.

Is an Edwards basher in denial! No cryingshame, Clark would NOT do as well!

#2. Please PROVE Clark would not do as well, as you assert. Was his name on the poll? Has there been a poll? What are the specifics of any polls that were done.

#3. I am an advocate for Clark but have NOT actively pushed him for VP. All I've ever done is correct erroneous, misleading or incomplete information that Edwards supporters and other DU'ers post here about Clark.

#4. If you consider an unvarnished look at Edwards himself as a candidate and his resume "bashing" then that is unfortunate.

Clark got only 7% in the SC primary, after out spending everybody else in the state, he finished behind sharpton. Now I know this is SC, but it shows the level of awareness and support for him in the South is just not there. If he does this poorly in the primary, adding him to the general election ticket will be of no help.

Second, Clark outspent all other candidates in that state throughout the ENTIRE primary process? Perhaps he did... got any objective facts?

Of course we can also look at the amount of FREE and FAVORABLE national press Clark got... next to none. Most of it was VERY negative.

But then, this is a thread about Edwards.

Edwards couldn't even beat Clark in NH even after having spent way more money and time there campaigning. Even after breaking NH campaign spending limits. Even with all the favorable press after Iowa. And then he and his campaign LIE and try and say that Clark outspent him there. Heck, if Edwards was happy lieing about NH...

Now back to the topic of this thread. In the poll cited here we have no idea:

how many people were polled
who these people were
how they were polled
where they are from
what the questions were

Again, the answers to several of your questions can be found there, or at the original (WRAL) link.

how many people were polled

Pollsters questioned 625 registered voters Friday through Monday.
(again, from the article you previously cited. According to the FEC of 5.1MM registered voters in NC, that works out to about 1 in 8160, *statistically equivalent to a nationwide poll of about 20K, if my math is right)


who these people were

see above

how they were polled

good question- coulda been phone polling, coulda been mall walking- tho M-D's accuracy rate suggests that it probably wasn't sloppy methodology... but just out of curiosity, what do you consider the most accurate polling method to be?

where they are from

Statewide, Bush is supported by 48% of voters, while Kerry is backed by 41%, independent Ralph Nader draws 3% and 8% remain undecided. With Edwards as Kerry's running-mate, the GOP ticket of Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney is favored by 46%, the Kerry/Edwards Democratic ticket gets 45%, Nader draws 2% and 7% are undecided.

Bush leads Kerry in five of the state's six regions, with Kerry ahead only in the Raleigh/Durham Triangle.
(from the WRAL link in the original thread- charts there too!)

what the questions were

I've emailed WRAL and M-D w/request for info. The news stories seem to imply that other names were mentioned, like Graham, for example. Guess we'll see.

And as to your title question, who's talking about Clark in an Edwards thread, see posts 5, 14, 19, 21, 24 for starters.

*ON EDIT- added "statistically" to avoid potential misunderstanding/nitpicking.

including the Winston-Salem Journal and Asheville Citizen-Times (Gannett) paper that ran this front page article today calling it "a Citizen/Times Mason-Dixon poll" :

http://cgi.citizen-times.com/cgi-bin/story/news/55071

This article on Mason-Dixon's website says that the poll did ask about other potential running mates and none of the others brought up Kerry's poll numbers to a dead heat besides Edwards:

http://www.mason-dixon.com/news_text.cfm?news_id=193

If John Edwards is on the ticket as Vice President, it should NOT be due to some mythical idea of "winning the South."

That's not going to happen unless you manage to dig up and resurrect George Wallace...oh yeah, and make him a modern day Democrat.

It pains me to say it, but the South is George W. Bush's. There are too many of my fellow Southerners who are either drooling idiots, bigots, or are just plain inattentive to the world outside of their commutes, their cubicles, their mortages, and their two weeks of freedom a year.

I think John Edwards would make an excellend choice as VP. But I don't think that it does anyone any good to try to make the argument that Edwards should be the VP because he can deliver the South. This is a counterfactual fairy tale writ large and it marginalizes the many compelling qualities that Edwards has that DO make him a good choice.

Where do many voters with potential populist leanings reside by coincidence????? WV, NC, AR, MO, KY.
Missouri is partially south culturally. Arkansas and Kentucky might be up for grabs. KY has a Dem leg. Not sure about AR. MO went Republican for the first time in 50 years, and people aren't happy with them. One reason is that they have been outright mean to people who require a leg up in a bad economy. Check out houseofhypocrites.com. Bad press= people are pissed. They are scared.
"The South" is not Texas. It is a mixed bag where there is a populist thread that weaves through. Farmers and labor are willing to listen when there is an economic downturn. The schools are getting screwed and everyone's property taxes just went up.
This JUST happened in a lot of places, and it presents an important contradiction in puke campaign rhetoric. They are seeing through the bullshit in a lot of rural areas. The Dems in my area have been driving that message home.
I didn't like the idea for a long time, but after talking to people around here who supported him, I really think that Edwards would give the campaign a populist appeal that would help in those areas.

The wingnut attack machine has been p*ssing on Edwards constantly here for the last two years.

If Edwards helps the Kerry ticket, rather than hurting it, then that particular wingnut message must not be meeting sympathetic ears. If that's the case, maybe some other wingnut bullsh*t is becoming ineffective as well.

Or it could just be that Edwards has great style and a dynamite stump speech.