Washington Post busts Kerry for citing non-existent poll results

Jockeying for Poll Position, Kerry Tries Unusual Spins

By Dana Milbank
Sunday, December 7, 2003; Page A04

The polls have not been kind to erstwhile front-runner John Kerry, so the Democratic presidential candidate has settled on a novel solution: make 'em up.

"Let me tell you something," he said Thursday on the CBS "Early Show." "John McCain was 30 points behind Bush in New Hampshire at this point in time." The point was clear: Kerry, far behind Howard Dean in New Hampshire, would have a come-from-behind victory, just as McCain did over George W. Bush in 2000.

Well, not exactly. At this time four years ago, an American Research Group poll found McCain with a 37 percent to 30 percent lead over Bush in New Hampshire. And a Franklin Pierce College poll put McCain's lead at 15 points.

This is not the first time Kerry has cited fanciful polling. A month ago, Kerry was asked at a debate about polls showing Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) ahead of all the actual Democratic candidates. "I saw a poll the other day that showed me about 15 points ahead of her," Kerry replied. But his campaign could produce no such poll.

And that blooper came just a day after Kerry said on CNN's "Inside Politics," "I am not as far behind in New Hampshire today as Al Gore was to Bill Bradley four years ago." Hmm. In November 1999, a Dartmouth College poll gave Gore a 7-point lead and a Newsweek poll put Gore's advantage at 10 points.

Seems that with all that turnover at the Kerry campaign, the research department is getting a bit thin.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A41834-2003Dec6.html

in more ways than one.

but isn't Senator John Kerry a Democratic Candidate for the Presidency of the USA in 2004?

We are all Democrats. Isn't the fight against Bush, Ashcroft, Rumsfield, Cheney and Delay?

Why are we attacking fellow Democrats? Only one candidate keeps attacking fellow Democratic Candidates. Howard Dean!

We are out to replace Bush. Keep our eye on the most important thing. We need to take back the govenment of this country from special interests and the pretend President of the USA. We need a Regime Change. Attacks against candidates who have dedicated their lives for all citizens of the USA deserve the respect they have earned.

DemoOut West

don't count, I guess.

only one candidate attacked other Democratic Canidates. Howard Dean! Why? I have tried to keep an open mind on all candidates. Dean's useless attack against the other Democretaic candidates was plain useless. Bush is the enemy!

DemOutWest

This is politics.

of politics! This is the Dean message. I agree with it. However, a U.S Senator who has fought for the common man since he returned from Vietnam demands more respect.

DemOutWest

Envoronment is Important!

In what way exactly?

has dedicated his life since the 1960's in making this world a better place. In 2002 , most of the population was up in arms over war. Most every one was supporting President Bush in the war in Iraq Including Governor Dean who conviently became an Anti-war candidate later.

GWB lied to the American peolple and did not follow the directives and wishes of the American people. To keep calling out true patriot Americans such as Senator Kerry, Lieberman, Edwards, General Clark and Congressman Gephardt is wrong.

We were all deceived.
This is about President Bush and his cronies!

Bush must go!

DemOutWest

is disrespectful, or even inaccurate.

Julie

Howard Dean wasn't deceived. I wasn't deceived, I knew the Bushies were a bunch of lying liars even before Al Franken told me so. That's just two people right there. I know there are a lot more of us here at DU who knew the whole war was a fraud before Kerry, Lieberman, Edwards and Gephardt voted for it. If we could figure it out, why couldn't they?

That Kerry also intends to win!

as far as Dean being the only candidate that's "attacking" another candidate…

"I voted for what I thought was best for the country. Did I expect Howard Dean to go off to the left and say, 'I'm against everything'? Sure. Did I expect George Bush to f - - - it up as badly as he did? I don't think anybody did," Kerry told the youth-oriented magazine.

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/43544.htm


"Dean has a profile that works with the biscotti and latte sipping crowd but is a much tougher sell for the biscuit and gravy crowd," said Chris Lehane, a senior adviser to General Clark, as he previewed the kind of attack that would be used against Dr. Dean. He said Dr. Dean "is from Park Avenue, he has no national security experience, he does not understand the South and is running an angry campaign. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/07/politics/campaigns/07DEMS.html?ei=5062&en=5a7032c3480ae561&ex=1071378000&partner=GOOGLE&pagewanted=print&position=


view Lieberman's latest ad

http://www.joe2004.com/site/DocServer/Better_Than_fin_1204.wvx?docID=841


I could go on & on…

:bounce: :yourock:

Dean is under a continual assult by the other dems and DU'ers.

only one candidate keeps the attack going, Howard Dean! This is about beating Bush to me. Dean is 9th out of 9 for doing this job.

DemOutWest

Shhh. See no evil, hear no evil, and all that.

If he's a Dem, doesn't matter what he does. Right?

Eloriel

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

this seems a non-story to me.

But then, this is about important as taking time to disrespect Kerry because he & his wife signed a prenup.

Where's the story on Dean calling Russia the Soviet Union 3 times during an interview on National TV?

Dana Milksop is the laziest "writer" on the WP staff.

or giving out totally bogus information is something that shouldn't be reported on?

that he was purposefully lying, you might have a story. The fact that he was in error in one statement doesnt exactly carry much weight to it. The phrasing of it seems to be overstating the significance, as if hed fabricated a poll rather than, as it seems, simply made a mistake.

people here jumped on him right after it happened at the debate.

he then continued to BS journalists about it for several days following the debate when they asked to see the poll.

It just sounds like he was making up statistics to support the notion that he can come back and win.

Pollgate, haircutgate. Go for it.

I hate it when that happens !

Damn that liberal media! Good thing Dana Milbank is focusing on, you know, issues and stuff.

It's probably easy to do after talking all day on the campaign trail. That doesn't change his 19-year record in the Senate as a courageous Liberal Democrat. Or his time as a Massachusetts state attorney. Or his courage under fire in Vietnam and under fire by Nixon for leading the efforts to end the war at home. So, yeah, Kerry's got a lot on his mind, just with what he's done.

BTW: Your horse never misspeaks, right, pruner? Ho-Ho just brings a note from his doctor and an X-ray. Once all his worries are gone, his mind is free to concentrate all day on the moguls.

I don't think that anyone can really understand just how hard it is to run for President.

A thoroughly decent person.

:toast:

But I am quite aware that he wants the best for all of us.

Even though I am a Dean supporter and want him to win, and I definitely needle Kerry supporters (because of my personality), I don't want Kerry to perform badly. I have watched Kerry for many years and thought that he was more dynamic and had more authority
than any other Democrat. I wanted him to challenge Gore in 2000, and I certainly wanted him to be the VP on the ticket after Gore was nominated.

However, until someone wins the nomination..........

I try to keep it above the belt.

It'll be nice when DU is united again. One land, one king.

Oh, wait, that's Excalibur. Well, close enough...

I'm sure he said nothing about the Education Trust Fund, service for college, weapons proliferation, nuclear bunker-buster bombs, health care, international relations, the environment, jobs, small business, nothing else at all. I love what gets posted as important issues in deciding a President.

1. Re Kerry: Nail, meet coffin.

2. Re Non-Kerry supporters: BOOKMARK THIS THREAD. There are some posts that begging to be brought back to haunt some folks. ;-)

3. I remember Gary Hart. Actially, Hart's candidacy was the first time I cared enough to register to vote. And then he self-destructed. Yes, he self-destructed. He dared reporters to follow him, and they did, and the whole thing blew up. And secretly (or subconsciously), Hart was glad.

Why? Because he seriously resented the whole, massive lack of privacy thimg involved in running for Prez. And afterwards he said precisely that. So, consciously or not, he set himself up to fall out so he wouldn't have to sacrifice his privacy.

I've never thought Kerry had the real desire to do this. There IS no fire in the belly -- not earlier, not with his new,improved campaign. Telling obvious little fibs like this is too stupid to be completely accidental and innocent (unless Kerry is a congential liar, which I'm not prepared to quite believe).

Will this sink him? Nahhh, probably not --but it could, if the press decides to pile on. But it REALLY is telling, at least to me.

Eloriel

Remember when all the Dee-Dees (Dean Detractors) jumped on Dean about his "Soviet Union" flub? A mistake, I might add, that many of us here admitted to being nothing and something we've done ourselves, having grown up during the Cold War. I seem to remember a lot of people claiming that mis-statement as being god-awful and career ending.

But making up poll numbers is nowhere near as bad as that, now is it?

:evilgrin:

I could say it shows how stupid Dean is but I know better. Just as I wouldn't dare suggest as honorable a person as Kerry is 'self-destructing', or is less than genuine.

But there's a bit of a difference between making up imaginary polls that have you magically in the lead compared to calling a country by it's old name. One is a mistake of memory or the tounge, the other is a mistake of facts.

There was a "Soviet Union" at one time, but there was never a poll that had Kerry leading over Hillary.

But both things are small...I agree.

It demonstrates they don't really have substantial criticisms, just small petty shit.

Juloie

Why is every Kerry statement vetted for factual integrity when the Niger claim of the SOTU was not? The IAEA and others at the UN had PROVEN the document a forgery, and yet nary a word until six months later, long after the war had "ended". I hate our media most for their targeted laziness and selective research.