Considering recent events, what is your gut feeling about the election?

Who will win in November, 2004?

IF the votes get honestly counted.

is a really big IF

:mad:

Or at least extremely close until either candidate jumps out to a solid lead depending on how circumstances are at the beginning of November. Probably sort of similar to the 1980 election.

If things (Iraq, economy, unemployment) are going well, then Bush will probably win by a relatively wide margin. If not, then Kerry comes out on top with a big lead.

...I think that Kerry will take it. Nothing is going well for Bush and it does not look to get better in the next 6 months.

I doubt people clearly remember how much better this country was four years ago. If they did, Bush wouldn't have a prayer and probably would have faced a primary challenger.

Bush has a chance only because events such as 9-11, the war in Afganistan, the build-up to the war on Iraq, the actual war and occupation, all obscure the big picture. Bush only has to make the country appear better off than it did six months to 1 year before the election, giving the appearance that the country has a positive momentum. If he can do that, Bush, unfortunately, has a chance to pull it off.

There are in fact several classes of invertebrate chordates, as our Democratic leadership has so successfully proved.

The Hagfish, aka "Slime Eel" (it is not an eel)

http://oceanlink.island.net/oinfo/hagfish/hagfish.html

The one in the lower left corner is closely related to Joe Lieberman....

And the non-vertebrate chordate pictured on the right is related to Zell Miller:



I'm not sure about the politics of the sea otter.

They obviously enjoy their lives to the extreme. . . that pretty much cuts out any possibility of them being conservative :).

I've always thought that they were pretty cool looking!

They were hanging out on the bottom of the ocean, eating a gray whale carcass down to the bones. Creepy, creepy things.

The Chordata is the animal phylum with which everyone is most intimately familiar, since it includes humans and other vertebrates. However, not all chordates are vertebrates.

So, what is the subphylum called? Vertebrata? :)

Hey, I just looked it up and I guessed right. Coolies for me.

Bush is UP in the polls this week! :)

There are a lot of people who don't like him but I don't think that everyone hates him. He will always have a loyal base.

Those icons on the right side of your sig don't load and make loading images on the rest of the page rather slow!

I may have to trash them. They're links for reaching me via instant messaging...which I haven't been using lately, anyway.

I don't think I can predict anything about the November elections, if they are held at all.

all of the indications are that Shrub is going down.

He's got his base charged up, but it's a small one, and the rest of the country just seems tired of him and his bullshit.

What they're going to do about it is another question. Vote Kerry? Stay home? Find a third party candidate?

And we know they're going to do everything they can to steal it again this time. I just hope we're all ready for them now.

money, lies, and incumbent power can be dismissed lightly, but an opponent who fails to carry the fight to bush is the worst of all worlds for the democratic party.

kerry was 6th on my list in the primaries, and i am reminded why each time i hear the man speak.

what a fucking mess. he's about as inspiring as a gob of spit on a sidewalk.

we democrats are in for a shit-storm come this fall unless kerry starts acting like he wants the presidency more than life itself.

what is more appalling is that considering the state of US domestic and foreign affairs, kerry ought to be up by 20 points in the polls.

i hate this, because i have been a democrat for over 30 years, but kerry will probably lose. i would not bet a plug nickel on his campaign if he doesn't start acting with a sense of urgency flowing thru his veins.

but if past is prelude, welcome bush to a second term.

If there is a winning strategy there, I sure as hell don't see it.

and perhaps i am missing something, but all i see is the dope part.

Hope you aren't one. Kerry isn't rope-a-doping, and that word sounds like some image-defining slogan straight out of Rove's "insult and slander" dictionary. You've been had if that's what you see.

Kerry is tied with Bush. Bush has gone from an 80% approval rating to below 50%. Kerry has earned more money than Bush. He's saying the right things, he's taking the attacks right at Bush, he is fighting back in fury to every slander Bush unleashes and making Bush pay for the fury.

The election is in November. Kerry is setting himself up for that. Rope-a-dope refers to the strategy Ali used to beat Foreman in the Philipines. Ali was the better boxer, but was old. He hung on the ropes, making Foreman wear himself out until the later rounds, when Ali, still fresh, came in and beat him. That's NOT what Kerry is doing. Kerry is attacking full throttle when Bush attacks, but when Bush is not attacking, or when Bush is being throttled by his own failures, Kerry is letting him hang himself. THAT's the way you do it. If Kerry began bashing Bush over Iraq, he would not help the situation in Iraq, but the Republicans would turn Kerry's statements into the story, rather than Bush's failures.

It's exactly what Clinton did in 92. It's the opposite of what Dukakis did. Dukakis fought early, and climbed to a big lead. Unfortunately, he spent himself in the early rounds, and revealed everything he had to Bush Daddy. Bush Daddy then had several months to cut away at Dukakis's work, defending himself, slandering Dukakis. Dukakis had no more criticisms he could launch, had no more strategy he could unleash. So he steadily declined until he lost.

Gore in 2000 laid low until the convention. He let Bush define him, slander him, and paint him into a corner. At the convention, Gore finally defended all the charges Bush had spent the last year and most of his money setting up. Gore wiped them away, then painted a new direction the entire campaign would go, by pledging not to attack Bush and by laying out a clear agenda to follow. Gore grabbed a large lead that held until the elections (with a few swings), and he won, though we know the rest of the story. Gore's lead would have been larger if the media hadn't slandered him after the debates, turning a clear victory into a loss.

Kerry's doing fine. If you want to see Bush defeated, pay attention and argue from awareness. If you want more of Bush, keep letting them define your perceptions. The media is owned by Republicans-- remember that.

I admit to feeling MIGHTY frustrated with politics in this country. I'm angry as hell at what the extreme right wing is doing through the Republican party. I'm pissed off and I want to see some JUSTICE for once. I can understand that 'letting * hang himself' "could be" a winning strategy. Maybe. But, DAMN, that feels risky. It is alienating me and I know a lot of people who feel this way. We WILL vote for Kerry but we're not happy about the prospect. There is so much to comment on or criticize in this mal-administration that is NOT Iraq...the Plame affair, for example. The handling of and dissembling on 9/11, etc.

On top of all that, as I said in another post below, what makes us think this is going to be a fare election? I don't doubt that if information were accurately reported, polls weren't rigged, AND if the voting machines weren't tampered with, ALMOST ANYONE could beat Bush. But the problem is, they DO control the flow of information, they DO distort the polls and they DO have Dibold (et al) machines in place.

I worry about the likelihood of elections, too. Don't blame the BBV, though. They cheated with good old fashioned pen and paper, they would cheat with any system. Some of these electronic machines even make it harder to cheat. (Unfortunately, not all). After December 12th, 2000, I have no faith that they will let our votes count if they don't want them to. (For any Freepers reading this, the Supreme Court ruled SPECIFICALLY that they knew votes were there which had not been counted (no recount, not counted even once), but that they would allow the election to be decided without counting all the votes. Read the decision, that's exactly what it says. You guys are screwed, too, you just haven't had to face it yet.)

But Kerry is playing it right. If he throws everything at Bush now, he will lose by November, because Bush will have all that time to trivialize everything. He's not playing a dangerous game, he's playing a certainty. You can't win if you lay it all out before the conventions. That's how it always works, people just forget it in later elections.

Kerry is saving all of this. He begins his attacks (and he has shown that he plans to attack Bush head on) after the convention, and as Bush is trying to fend off one attack, kerry unleashes another, until bush is realling. In between attacks, he lays out his plans for the future. That's how you fight an incumbant, especially one with as much baggage as Bush has.

Bush is in trouble. Big, bad trouble. Don't miss that point.

as a way of defending his lack of rebuttals to the rove machine's manufacturing of kerry's image.

it was a trick some said, to wear out bush and have him spend $59M.

yeah, right.

my perceptions are not blinded by blatant homerism for my side. and your remark that place my perceptions as stemming from brainwashing would be damned funny if it weren't so fucking stupid.

that is a blindness from objectivity better found elsewhere.

i am not a pie in the sky pollyanna about what has to be done to beat bush and i will not buy into feel goodies concerning kerry. he hasn't done a good job so far, and if he doesn't, he's toast....and so are the rest of us.

bush's polling numbers going down was not unexpected: it happened to bush the smarter as well, and pointing to the obvious is useless.

how you get the idea that kerry is actually responding to the bush campaign's attacks is beyond me. even with the press kerry can't even defend himself in front of the likes of a moron such as charlie gibson without fucking up his own defense.

i watched that and had this bitter memory of the response dukakis made in the '88 debate on what he would do if his wife was raped.

"good jesus christ! what the hell are you doing! would you just act like a normal human being instead of trying to explain every little detail."

while bush is injured politically he still holds the white house with all its perks and powers, and he has an organization that knows damn well how to use it....and he still has $150M left to attack kerry.

look, the most effective way kerry can improve in the polls is for him to show how his story, his narrative of the place america has in the world and his ideas and ideals of america are the same ones shared by the majority of the voters. he has to articulate his vision in terms that these voters understand.

he hasn't done it yet.

this is not all the fault of rove and his minions. it is a poorly developed message and campaign kerry has right now. he has to fix it

btw: i shall let pass without comment your regrettably insane proposition that i support bush.

Rope-a-dope was first used around here by Kerry bashers. His supporters claimed Kerry was pacing himself, and his bashers lept to the rope-a-dope term. Big difference.

Kerry's doing everything he needs to be doing. Yes, he is going to screw up sometimes. Yes, he will have bad weeks and give bad answers. Yes, Bush is still going to campaign just as hard as Kerry and is going to win some battles, and will even win a few weeks of positive ratings. Bush will have bad weeks, too.

But Kerry is fighting Bush hard, he's raising money, he's turning opinions of Bush by constantly attacking him, he won the whole "I served, he didn't" battle no matter how hung up on trivial definitions of medals the media got, and he's remaining a viable candidate. Rove announced that he would use these three months to define Kerry, so Kerry is running interference and defense right now. Good strategy, let the Republicans reveal what they think they can do. So far Rove is failing miserably, because Kerry has answers to every accusation Bush has made, and has returned the accusations on Bush. Bush has been on the defensive more because of his own attacks than he has been on the offensive. And all around him the sky is falling.

As for Bush Daddy falling at this point in the campaign, that wasn't just something that happened, that was due in large part to Perot's attacks on him, and to Clinton's earlier campaigning, painting Bush as out of touch. Drops in approval don't just happen, not when the media is selling you 24/7. It's part of a strategy that you have just missed.

This isn't pollyanna for Kerry, this is exactly the strategy i'd have recommended he follow, and frankly, since I wasn't a Kerry backer, it surprises me that he's got the sense to do it this way.

I'm sorry he's not setting off fireworks to make you go "oooo" each night. That's not how you win. People get worn out on fireworks quickly, so you save them until the end. Go watch an opera, and see how it builds. When you put your climax at the beginning, people go home before the end.

And if the Republican shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it. That was directed at those it does fit, and they are here, with high post counts. Republicans are big at disrupting, and at push polling, and have been doing it for several elections now. Just because DU is new to this presidential election doesn't mean that internet bulletin boards are. I've seen this tactic for three elections, now, and it is beyond a doubt orchestrated. If you aren't part of it, and I have no reason to believe you are, then good. Some are. So don't believe them.

Kerry is doing everything right.

But I think we've completely lost even the illusion of a Democracy in this country. They're going to steal the election. Why not? They stole the one in 2000 and got away with it didn't they? I don't think the votes were accurately counted in the 2002 election but I have nothing to back that up. What makes us think they aren't going to steal 2004? There polls will "say" it is a "close election"--whether it IS one or not--Dibold will do the rest.

These people who have taken over our government are ruthless. If 9/11 and the war in Iraq hasn't convinced you of that, what is it going to take? You think they are going to play fare--are going to risk LOOSING their seats of power in a fare election? I really don't think that people who steal elections and use political office to murder and wage war and fill their own coffers are going to go "quietly" into the night, do you?

I feel hopeless. :-(

Iraqification could cool off the whole thing and it might be hugs and kisses (or look that way) come election time. The economy might perk up enough, gas prices drop and Osama turn up. Bush could handily win with mild coattails, which, coupled with the Texas and Colorado thieveries, could give them everything they need.

Then again, it could all go the opposite way and heap us with even more woes, giving Kerry a handy mandate and some reasonable coattails.

Like everything else in life, it'll probably be somewhere in the middle, and it's WAY too early to tell.

Americans love a prodigal, and if Bush gets plenty of egg on his face but can somehow be seen to redeem himself, well, you get the idea.

Declares himself temporary dictator using bunker gov't until a time when America can again become a democracy. He then launches nukes at every Middle Eastern capital, installs himself as dictator of those countries as well, and orders the secret arrests of all DUers.

What do think the purpose of that shadow government is, anyway?

I do think many are tired of Bush's shit though.

running around the country, giving speeches, raising money, fighting off the republican attack machine, etc. etc. indicates to me he wants the job.


i don't know what kerry you're seeing...?

Kerry's campaigning his ass off, doing and saying the right things, and raising more money than Bush. What part of that is him acting like he doesn't want the job?

I swear, if Kerry hasn't knocked on some people's door that morning and told them "Kerry did and said this ten minutes ago" they say he isn't running a good campaign. Pay more attention. Unless this is some agenda OTHER than to see Kerry elected.

It'll be a great eight years. Kerry has a way about him of getting things done. And look at his votig record, rather than the GOPAC infiltrators who claim he's a moderate. Kerry's a leftist. This should give all Democrats a reason to smile.

Bush will win. Then, we will die.

One day, anyway. Hopefully the first part is just depression!

Bush has fallen from near 90% approval to below 50%, just like his father. People don't trust him anymore, they just haven't found a good reason to say they won't vote for him again. Kerry is sitting pretty, and setting himself up to surge after the conventions, when he chooses a running mate and lays out his program.

Believe me, Rove's optimism is much lower than yours right now.

Also, notice Kerry's strategy all along. Before he makes a big move, like releasing his military records, he lets Bush think he's won. Then the Republicans start crowing, and the Kerry says "Oh, you want to this, then?" and releases or does whatever he needs to deflate all of Bush's work. Good strategy. The person with momentum wins, not the person with an early lead.

of 2000 and 2002, my gut feeling because no matter how bad things go for chimpy kerry can't seem to be able to get the momentum. :cry:

He's all alone out there facing both Bush and Cheney.

They'll probably resort to the most vile of stuff. This "ribbons or medals thrown over the fence" nonsense will be nothing compared to what they'll paint Kerry as. And the American people will buy Bush's horseshit.

Saying this with tears in my eyes. Bush for another 4 years. Nothing changed in the Senate or House. Lame ass Terry McAuliffe trying to put a desperate spin on this disaster.

OTOH, there are days that I indeed feel that the crime cabal will steal another election.

:-( :-( :-(

:cry:

DemEx