Few Democratic Voters are Paying Attention. Lieberman & Gephardt leading.

New poll show that the race for the Democratic nomination is still wide open, with Joe Lieberman & Dick Gephardt leading!


Few Paying Mind to Democratic Candidates
By The Associated Press
08/31/2003 10:28:39 EST

http://www.pennlive.com/newsflash/lateststories/index.ssf?/base/politics-0/1062344042115782.xml

Most voters haven't started paying attention to the Democratic presidential race, says a poll released on Labor Day weekend - the campaign's traditional starting point.

Two-thirds of voters - including two-thirds of Democrats - were unable to name any of the Democratic candidates for president, said the CBS News poll out Sunday.

Joe Lieberman, Dick Gephardt and Howard Dean topped the field in the poll, with relatively low numbers that suggest the race remains wide open.

Lieberman, Gephardt and Dean were the only three in double digits in support from registered Democrats. Lieberman, a Connecticut senator, had the backing of 14 percent; Gephardt, a Missouri congressman, was backed by 11 percent; and Dean, former governor of Vermont was at 10 percent. Other candidates were in single digits.

John Kerry, a Massachusetts senator, was at 5 percent after being in double digits in national polls most of the year. Kerry will try to spark his campaign this week with the formal announcement of his candidacy.

Al Sharpton had 5 percent; Bob Graham, a senator from Florida was at 4 percent; John Edwards, a senator from North Carolina, had 2 percent; Carol Moseley Braun was at 2 percent; and Dennis Kucinich, an Ohio congressman, had 0 percent.

Four in 10 Democratic voters said they were satisfied with the current field of nine candidates, while half said they would like more choices.

When all voters were asked whether President Bush will definitely be re-elected, 38 percent said yes, but 50 percent said they think a Democrat can win. When voters were asked the same question about Bush's father in October 1991, 66 percent said yes, but that number dropped 20 points in the next month. The first President Bush lost his re-election bid.

The poll of 775 registered voters was taken Aug. 26-28 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points, larger for subgroups like Democratic voters.

Who made you smarter than the rest of us?

Just that run-of-the-mill Democrats don't get involved enough. I talk to the few I know in my community and I have to tell them about the issues that are affecting the US right now (that is one of the ways I try to get involved). They have no idea. They watch TV news, read the local paper, and are pretty uninformed. Smart or intelligent is not the issue. Not being informed is (but, then, smart would mean trying to get informed, so...)
For example, my neighbor, a member of the Carpenters' Union, did not know who Karl Rove is.

That's different. But calling people sheeple implies that they can't think or that they aren't stupid. Their not being informed is not a matter of stupidity. It's our job to make them informed.

I can't stand people who act like they are so much smarter than the rest of the country, and unfortunately, we see a lot of it here. I have actually started keeping a blog that records whenever someone refers to the American people as "sheeple" or says that "Americans are stupid" or other remarks that imply that those who do not agree with us politically are of a lesser intelligence. It is pretty disturbing, and I think it turns a lot of people off and that is a big part of why voters in certain parts of the country vote Republican against their own economic interests, because they view the Democratic Party as a bunch of snotty elitists who look down upon them.

Please share!

1. Two-thirds of voters - including two-thirds of Democrats - were unable to name any of the Democratic candidates for president, said the CBS News poll out Sunday.

2. Four in 10 Democratic voters said they were satisfied with the current field of nine candidates, while half said they would like more choices.

So, let's see if I've got this straight. 33% of Democrats can name at least one candidate, but 40% say they're satisfied with the current field of candidates.

Either the poll is bogus, or people are really, really stupid.

"half said they would like more choices."

That means that there are a significant number of people who can't name a single candidate, and at the same time would like more choices. I don't even want to try figuring out what that means.

That is hysterical.

"I need at least 15 or 20 people I cannot name to choose from."

To see who has the most famous name.

Of course, the candidates with national exposure rank first.

Look at the state by state numbers, not the national numbers.

...they're polling Democrats. ALL Democrats get to resond.

But in primaries, the true believers are the ones who come out to vote in force.

I don't think Holy Joe and Gephardt will have the support that these polls show no.

Calling other elected Democrats names when you are running for office is not the best strategy. Let's assume that--heaven forbid!--Lieberman becomes the nominee. And let's assume that he comes to Ohio to campaign for the ticket and he sees that you called him names on a board. And let's assume that he tells people who have money not to bother with you since you insulted him. He may not want to help you and may ignore you completely. Same thing goes for the other eight candidates running.

Look, I'm not telling you what to do. And this is constructive advice. But you really need to watch what you say here as your opponent will inevitably google this board and use your words against you. You are a public figure now, not just an average person.

I want you to do well. But the way you've posted here recently--using the term fascist, Repuke, and Holy Joe--is not the way to win an election. I can see Regula using a post from here to say negative things about you that could sink your campaign.

Please listen to me as I don't want one of your posts here ending up in a negative ad or in literature that is dropped from door to door.

That sounds like good advice. It never hurts to take the high road, in public, and early in the campaign.

nbt

Dean seems to have a solid lead with Kerry the strongest challenger.

Maybe they meant Joe and Dick were leading the race to kiss Junior's ass? They have both been good at that the last 2 1/2 years.

His recent publicity has given him the same level of name recognition and national support as Lieberman and Gephardt, when the MOE is considered. As more voters become interested in the race, the better known candidates with a message will have the advantage over the candidates who are not well known.

.. which candidate's supporters are most likely to show-up at the polls/caucuses? Hmm..

Can someone please explain to me how these variou polls come up with Lieberman leading and Gephardt close sevcond if not leading in
some----yet these two are not doing at all wellin the Primary States. In Iowa, New hampshire and South Carolina they are not doing that well. Dean is beating Gephardt in Iowa. Is someone playing games?? Ever so often someone pulls out this poll with Liebrman leading yet he has no traction anywhere.

Gephardt and Lieberman are the two best known candidates by a lot. Lieberman has been on a national ticket before. The people of NH and IA are way, way, way more likely to know all of the candidates. Thus in those states Dean is doing well since as people get to know him they get to like him.

I'm glad we agree on something. :thumbsup:

I took the poster's question to mean why is Dean in first in NH and IA but in 3rd or 4th nationally.

I assumed her point was that, in a process that assigns delegates on a state by state basis, national polls aren't very relevent. Especially in a process that doesn't do the best job of assigning delegates proportionally based on the primary results.

The some of the polls that worry me show Lieberman as one of the two leading contenders in both South Carolina and Maryland. But the results in Iowa and N.H. would probably change this completely.

Wow. Glad the campaign is about to begin.

:) for President Kucinich.

Not everyone has the luxury to spend hours a day scouring message boards and news sites to get informed. People are more concerned with working to put food on the table and raising their kids than an election 15 months away as well they should be.

Sure, you can poll Democrats in Illinois and North Dakota, but does it mean anything?

I'm new here, so I could be wrong, but I find it amusing that the national "frontrunner" has zero support on this board. Some believe any candidate would be better than Bush-such as myself-but no one will defend Joe over other candidates.

if you attack candidates for preaching the Democratic message, then you will not have many who will defend you. But if you have a message that will help those who are uninsured, unemployed, or want to leave behind a better nation for our children...then even those Democrats who are undecided would be willing to defend you, because you are defending them.

Or is it just that it's early?

Either way, no one has numbers worth mentioning, and I wouldn't be claiming any great victories if I was Gephardt and Lieberman. In fact, it seems to me that Lieberman's campaign is (rightfully) dead in the water, and Gephardt seems content to get Labor behind him for leverage rather than the nomination. Leverage for what, I don't know. The VP slot?

The only polls I've seen with Gep and Lieberman in the lead were from January, up to about July.