Post-Saddam Poll::: Dean Does Better Against Bush than Clark

This poll was taken after Saddam's capture.

Bush 52
Dean 31

Bush 53
Clark 28

NBC/Wall Street Journal Poll

The Saturday numbers pitting Bush against Dean, "if the election were held today," Bush at 51 percent, Dean at 39 percent. On Sunday, after events in Iraq were dominating the news cycle, Bush's lead increased to 52 percent while support for Dean dropped to 31 percent.

Bush led Clark, 50 percent to 34 percent in the Saturday numbers. By Sunday, support for the president had risen to 53 percent while Clark's dropped to 28 percent, leading some analysts to suggest that good news out of the region hurts the basis of the retired general's candidacy.

link:

http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20031216-122357-3571r.htm

:puke: no credibility there

The only numbers I've seen like that are from Montana.

DTH

Just like to see how the questions are framed. :)

than Dean's

;)

Here's an article from the Washington Times that reports the poll results.

http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20031216-122357-3571r.htm

WASHINGTON, Dec. 16 (UPI) -- An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll published Tuesday says Saddam's arrest cost the Democrats support in head-to-head match ups against President Bush.

snip

The Saturday numbers pitting Bush against Dean, "if the election were held today," Bush at 51 percent, Dean at 39 percent. On Sunday, after events in Iraq were dominating the news cycle, Bush's lead increased to 52 percent while support for Dean dropped to 31 percent.

Bush led Clark, 50 percent to 34 percent in the Saturday numbers. By Sunday, support for the president had risen to 53 percent while Clark's dropped to 28 percent, leading some analysts to suggest that good news out of the region hurts the basis of the retired general's candidacy.

They both do really poorly. I just hope one of our dems can kick the heck out of bush* and soon.

You have to expect that Bush would get a bump with the capture and the wall-to-wall coverage. But that won't last.

Bush did better against Gore during this same time in 1999.

So the numbers don't worry me too much.

I am not sure this is something to trumpet. Both Dean and Clark get their asses kicked, and the difference between the two is less than a typical margin of error.

Do you really think this reflects positively for Dean? Clark came in late, has raised less money, yet is only 3 negligible points behind Dean, and both over 20 points behind Bush.

Not good at all.

Edit: This is an example of relentless Dean boosterism gone amok. Comparing who loses better to Bush! :eyes:

Come back and post a poll when Dean beats Bush.

and that we're eleven months away from the general election. This poll reflects the post-saddam boost which is temporary at best.

We all know the Saddam effect is temporary and small at best.

It also looks like a smack on Clark, and I thought the Dean people were above that, since they HATE it when people do it to them.

Since I favor neither Dean nor Clark, consider this a pretty damn objective point.

then you damn well better DO BETTER against Bush.

the post.

:kick: