Bush ahead in all recent polls.

http://pollingreport.com/

Now I'm not saying the sky is falling, but an aggressive response to the ads that are lies might be in order. Kerry is allowing them to define him, and once that's done it will be hard to set the record straight.

His Ship Is Already Sinking.

Unless a strong defense and renewed offense is mounted he is sunk.

These are observations, no flames please.

But I'm confident Kerry will be fine. He did have a couple of tough weeks before the Clarke revelations gave him a breather. It is tough, though, competing against an incumbent with a huge war chest.

Pew Research Center for the People & the Press survey conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates. March 22-28, 2004. N=1,168 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 3.5 has Kerry ahead if Nader not a factor:

George W. Bush JohnKerry Other/Unsure
% % %
3/22-28/04 46 47 7
3/17-21/04 43 52 5
2/24-29/04 44 48 8


Newsweek Poll conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates. March 25-26, 2004. N=815 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 4 (for all registered voters) also has Kerry ahead in a 2 way:

George W. Bush John Kerry Other (vol.)/Undecided
% % %
3/25-26/04 47 48 5
3/18-19/04 48 48 4
2/19-20/04 45 48 7


But of more interest - showing the lack of effect of the first 20 million by Bush is this:

"In general, would you like to see George W. Bush reelected to another term as president, or not?"

Yes No Don't Know
% % %
3/25-26/04 45 50 5
3/18-19/04 46 50 4
2/19-20/04 43 52 5

Calculate voter support measuring the years 2004 compared to 2000.

There can only be ONE anser: Bush - Less Popular, today.

Divide the political 'spectrum' 180 degree pie chart:

Left/Right + subdivisions, liberal, moderate, conservative, progressive, minorities, priorities, etc.

More of the "Middle Majority", Moderate classes, of the left and right are decidedly against Bush; no question.

Bush has less of the popular vote than he lost the last time.

"The Real Poll Results"

Have Bush LOSE the popular vote by greater numbers than 4 sorry years ago.


-----BUSH-----NOT--SAFER------NOT--STRONGER-----

and that shows. He's so used to being "middle of the road" and taking both sides of the issue. Kerry lacks the passion and the conviction Dean has. That's why I am skeptical that Kerry can make people go out and vote for him in mass. Dean would have fought harder and stronger. Too bad the conventional wisdom (aka Kerry) won and now it is too late to have a real leader such as Dean.

Kerry needs to start running some ads.

On the other hand, I'm not very concerned about the polls. These are my reasons:

1. If you look at the margin of error (plus or minus points), these polls show Kerry and Bush in a statistical dead heat. The press don't understand that (probably on purpose).

2. The polls are not necessarily reliable. I think that there is a lot of bias in the way that samples are chosen. There is definite bias in the way that questions are worded. There may be bias or even outright fraud in the way that the numbers are presented. Remember that most polling agencies are private companies who need to make their clients happy. And there is obvious pressure on all branches of the "news" (entertainment) media to spin things pro-Bush.

3. It is very early in the race. People know Bush, but many of them are only vaguely aware of Kerry. Remember that most Americans don't care about politics like we do, and they aren't paying much attention now. This may be a sign of mental health on their parts!

4. I would argue that it is a good thing for Kerry to be slightly behind right now. We want the Bush cabal to feel complacent, not worried.

I've seen it several times - during MTP, News, etc

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0322.html

BTW, Rasmussen has Kerry 51% Bush 41% in Iowa

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Iowa%20March%2025.htm

Take a look at other state polls there,

Have also seen moveon negative Bush ads.

Incumbents who are in close races at this point in their reelection campaigns unfailingly lose. Reagan, Clinton, Nixon, Johnson and Eisenhower all had double-digits leads seven months before the election.

should join the mudfest.

Does Kerry have the warchest to fight aggressively now AND later?

Surely he hasn't given us the best he's got yet? If so, by July, we will be some pretty sad puppies.

Bush is labeling him and he is not responding enough or not doing it wisely.

For example Bush adds say Kerry voted in the mid 90s to cut defense spending. Why cant Kerry counter saying the cold war was over and that national debt and the deficit were serious problems at that time? IT makes perfect sense to me that defense spending should have been cut at that time. Why cant Kerry convey that message out to the public???

Kerry is allowing Bush to define and dictate him. Bush gives half the story, but Kerry does not set the record straight. Instead he tries to counterattack.

Kerry needs to hire more of Clintons people. What is Carville doing these days?

that Kerry is sinking faster than the Titanic. He's been too silent, and today there was an article on CNN that said he would be out for a week after his shoulder operation. Not good. This is one campaign where he needs to be out there all the time.

I've hardly read bugger-all about his campaign since he went on vacation. He needs to keep the heat on Shrub. More time off right now is not a good idea.

"Tuesday March 30, 2004--The latest Rasmussen Reports Presidential Tracking Poll shows Senator John F. Kerry at 47%, President George W. Bush at 45%, and "some other candidate" at 4%."

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Presidential_Tracking_Poll.htm

n/t

Nader doesn't care about the harm he causes as long as he gets attention. We need to accept that reality.

and check out the Nader story linked at http://talkingpointsmemo.com

I think something is "afoot" between the Nader and Kerry campaigns.

Kerry is going to ask Nader to be his VP! Edwards or Clark would cinch it for Kerry.

We all know that Nader is big on bringing down the two party system. Could this meeting between Nader and Kerry be Nader pushing Kerry to adopt some of his platform, therefore creating a "coalition" type government? Thus, Nader will only seek to get on the Ballot in Bush states, support Kerry in the swing and Dem states, and thus effectuate a Kerry win?

I like Ralph. I voted Ralph last election. I still respect and like Ralph and agree with him on a lot of issues. He's not out to screw the democrats. He's not out to ruin the Dems chances of winning the white house. he's out to make positive changes in society.

There is no way to know what the meeting is about, but Ralph's efforts to end the two party system may end up successful if he keeps this up. We will end up with a one party system.

It doesn't matter whether Ralph intends to bring down the Democrats if his actions have that effect. He may wish to bring about positive change but the result of that effort if he stays in the race will be entirely negative.

:hi:

I'm in College Park.

Nader is in it to feed his ego. And there is nothing we can do about it.

:boring: wake me in October...

His is the only poll with any real accuracy.

The others are just posers.

n/t

he'd be even or ahead.

Kerry runs even with Bush, or a point or two ahead, when it's a two-man race. According to an AP article on Josh Marshall's site, Nader said he is meeting with Kerry in April. I suspect he'll drop out or endorse Kerry. So pay no attention to polls with Nader in them.

has happened that should have changed his mind. He was hated before he announced and for the last four years. That apparently caused no reflection, why would he drop out now?

An endorsement of Kerry wouldn't mean much unless Nader also dropped out. For now we have to go forward as if he will still be in the race in November.

But in the article Marshall linked, Nader mentioned a meeting with Kerry next month (he never met with Gore in 2000) and talked about his campaign being a small front in the war against Bush. Maybe Nader will promise not to get on the ballot in any state where he could affect the outcome.

candidate to endorse the opponent but stay in the race just to keep his issues out there.

ahead. I mean, think about it guys. This is all margin of error stuff; they can't be happy about this plus woodward's and wilson's books are both coming out soon.

Kerry doesn't even have the visibility yet. No debates, no TV campaign like the IA and NH ads. Kerry is running strong for March.

"Worse than Watergate"!
:bounce:

I had not been taking that into account. All these Nader respondents are going to walk into the polls and be faced with a choice between Bush, Kerry, the Democratic Socialists or the Natural Law party. That 4% will go overwhelmingly for Kerry.

It takes the Party machinery working hard...

Chimpy is running exclusively on 9-11 - and now the country has been focused for some time on allegations by White House insiders and others - that the Evil/Clueless War Chimp was grossly negligent in dealing with terrorism - and that 9-11 was preventable! This CANNOT due anything but annihilate Bush with swing voters - cost him monderate Repukes - and further alienate him from all Democrats (who are the majority)! Add to that, the fact that Bush's incredibly awful jokes about his missing WMD's got some wide air play - and this all adds up to an incumbent pResident very likely headed for the biggest landslide defeat in U.S. history!! You know this is true - talk to the average person right now. Check out the mainstream message boards. Where 2 years ago, Chimp admirers where the clear majority - today they are probably one in ten posters! My Repuke in-laws from Ohio told me they would never vote for Bush again - and would vote for ANY Dem who won the nomination - in an effort to oust the insane and stupid Bush!! This guy's support is totally shot - and only the whore corporate media propping him up at this point - with their phony characterization of the hated Chimpy as "popular, trusted and respected"!!!

Unfortuntely, your response is typical of many DU'ers, who simply cannot conceive of the possiblity that more voters would prefer Bush to Kerry. I believe this kind of cognitive dissonance is fueled by the tendency of DU'ers to associate only with people who are sympathetic to their left-wing views. It's a big world out there, and there are literally tens of millions of Americans who would vehemently disagree with virtually everything that is said around here. DU'ers also have a tendency to be unfamiliar with electoral trends. The fact is, no Democratic candidate has received a majority of the popular vote -- a MAJORITY, not a plurality -- since Jimmy Carter in 1976. And only one Democrat in the past fifty years -- LBJ -- has received substantially more than 50% of the vote. With Bush facing no challenge from the right, the odds would be against any Democratic challenger. Factor in Kerry's liberal voting record, fundraising disadvantage, and a media that is heavily populated with Bush sympathizers, and it's pretty obvious that the betting money should be on Bush, not Kerry.

Bush is not just any Republican! He is a disaster that is going to destroy his party!

As much as we hate Bush, the other side thinks he's great!

The country is very divided, & the election will come down to turnout, newly registered voters, & the few independents & undecideds in the middle.

If you think the Repubs will vote for Kerry, I have a bridge you might be interested in buying.

A lot of people are not loyal to either party and do not follow politics. But they cant help but notice that the job market is still slow and that Iraq is a mess.

I didn't forget the Independents.

87 out of the 100 most recent trolls to register at DU report that if the election were held today, they would vote for George W. Bush. Ralph Nader would get 6 votes. Two would vote for whomever the Ba'ath Party nominates, with the reminder being undecided.

For one thing I've been here since 2001, which hardly constitutes a new registrant. Second, simply pointing out the facts shouldn't disturb you so, these are issues worthy of discussion.

Did you have a point in there somewhere?

I'm not even disputing the CNN/USA TODAY/Gallup Poll, although I am skeptical.

I was just trying to be funny.

I guess I really am worried that Chimp may pull this off. He has so many advantages, not the least of which is BBV.

the media is ignoring the issues and giving bush hourly bjs like usual.

. He hasn't done that, and these groups are in more or less a state of depression right now.

Come on, ya'll it was back and forth the whole time.

Don't make me start passing these out:

we may be in damage control mode before long. Instead of contributing more to Kerry I'm sending my money to Feingold. He will be vigorously attacked by Rove and absolutely must retain his seat.

with slight edge to Kerry recently. And the White House is in damage control now.

Bush is not pulling away. It is the end of March. The election isn't until November. Bush just ran a bunch of anti-Kerry ads and he is still in a statistical tie and he has high negatives. Iraq is still uncertain, job growth is still soft and gas prices are still going up. This election will turn on the performance of Bush, not Kerry. All the rest of it is fluff.

He is pulling away in this race. Just staying even would be great for him now (with all of the potentially damaging news coming out) but he has caught and overtaken Kerry while spending only a very small fraction of his war chest.

My contributions from now on go to senate and congressional candidates, good solid liberal Democrats, who will be in dogfights come November.

Sorry, but I see the presidential race as a probable Bush rout at this point.

In fact an average of all of the polls show a total that has Bush just 1.2 percent higher than Kerry in most of these national polls which is the closest between the two yet, with Bush dropping in his weekly lead in the average of polls from his high of an actual eight point statistical lead, down to 6 points two weeks ago, to 1.2 percent today. If anything, the trend clearly shows Kerry and Bush in a dead heat, rather than with Bush having the lead that he gained in march. And that is with Nader in the race. In the polls in which Nader is removed, Kerry leads Bush in 4 of the 6 polls taken this week, ties in another, and in the sixth, Bush has a 3 point lead in a poll with a 4.5 point margin of error.

Lets check the polls this week:

RCP Average (3/23 - 3/30) 45.2% 44.0% 4.5% Bush +1.2
Rasmussen (3/28-3/30) 45% 47% - Kerry +2
CNN/Gallup/USAT(3/26-3/28) 49% 45% 4% Bush +4
Pew Research (3/22-3/28) 44% 43% 6% Bush +1
Newsweek (3/25-3/26) 45% 43% 5% Bush +2
Fox News/Op Dyn (3/23-3/24) 43% 42% 3% Bush +1


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Go back to last week:

Quinnipiac (3/16-3/22) 46% 40% 6% Bush +6
AP/Ipsos (3/19-3/21) 46% 43% 5% Bush +3
Democracy Corps (3/16-3/21) 50% 47% - Bush +3
Insider Advantage (3/18-3/19) 46% 41% 4% Bush +5
Zogby (3/17-3/19) 46% 46% 3% TIE
Newsweek (3/18-3/19) 45% 43% 5% Bush +2
CBS News/NYT (3/10-3/14) 46% 38% 7% Bush +8


Now take Nader out of the picture:

Poll Bush Kerry Spread
RCP Average (3/23 - 3/30) 46.6% 46.6% TIE
Rasmussen (3/28-3/30) 45% 47% Kerry +2
CNN/Gallup/USAT(3/26-3/28) 51% 47% Bush +4
Pew Research (3/22-3/28) 46% 47% Kerry +1
Newsweek (3/25-3/26) 47% 48% Kerry +1
Fox News/Op Dyn (3/23-3/24) 44% 44% TIE
Quinnipiac (3/16-3/22) 46% 43% Bush +3


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/bush_vs_kerry.html

Absolutely no justification for the statement that Bush is trending upward.

Last month Bush was down 12 points. Now he's up 4 points.

In the polling that took place in the 17 battleground states (where Bush is running all his ads) the gain is even bigger. Last month Kerry led 63%-35% in those 17 battleground states. Now Bush leads 51%-46%. A net +33% gain in the most important states does show a trend favoring Bush.

Whether it continues or not is another thing.

collecting.

If I could, I'd donate to Dean's grassroots organization. That's where the real change will occur eventually. When enough people get pissed off.

All of these politicians are subject to big business interests: the corporations run the country. So - really - what can a politician who doesn't have as much support from business do? In the end, these campaigns are just mass advertising. Money, and the media, talk.

All of those polls are within MOE.

It is the Republicans dream that all liberals would give in so easily.

Unfortunately for us, wimply elected officials giving up is why we are in this position in the first place.

I want my time and money (both limited) to have the maximum effect. Therefore, I'm shifting my focus to the congressional races.

For the record, I have already donated twice to Kerry.

Which is a pretty good place to be when you are a challenger.

Latest Rasmussen has kerry ahead of Bush now 47 - 45.


http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Presidential_Tracking_Poll.htm

And actually ALL of these polls do not indicate that Bush is ahead. but they Kerry and Bush are statistically in a dead heat. If the two numbers fall within the margin of error, you may as well throw away any differnces in the points between the two candidates.

In fact if anything, these polls are extrememly bad news for Bush because this early in any campaign, the incumbent always shows some statistical lead on the person running against them, that is the incumbent shows numbers beyond the margin or error in comparison to the opposition. Kerry should not be runnning anything this close to Bush this early in the campaign, but shold by all historical accounts, be at around 7 to 10 points behind Bush.

and strike a little closer to summer...afer Easter, I think, it's on!

He'll do quite well in the general election.

After his vacation he'll come out swinging and be back in the hunt. No worries mate.

Not to mention the $20 million the GOP just dumped on bash-Kerry ads, which are running night and day on all major media outlets.

And Kerry is still a bit of an unknown quantity.

As soon as the Democratic Party starts getting *its* message out, look for a reversal in these numbers.

I'm dreading a repeat of 2000.

Let me just whisper this question here, hoping for a real answer and not a flame war.

Given the polls above, given the "with Nader" and "without Nader" discrepancies in such polls, given the threads day after day in which Nader supporters blast the Democratic candidate for being insufficiently Nader-like, given the belief that the Democratic party is hardly different from the Republican party, and given that we are *not* all advancing the same goal of ousting Bush by electing a Democrat, why are Nader supporters considered by DU to be "progressives who will work with us to achieve our shared goals?"

I'm asking that seriously, and apologize in advance if it sounds hostile. Not my intent.

I think I've seen a few other polls by them which favored Bush by large margins...

That's the only poll that worries me. The others look like ties. All in all, not to bad for a challenger.

Nader... now it's a new word replacement for a fly in the ointment or a bug in the software.

As used:

Man, I was doing alright until I got Nadered.

Or...

I couldn't believe how well I was doing until a goddamn Nader came out of nowhere.

Or...

I was playing lead guitar until my strings Nadered on me and I had to deal with broken strings.

Or...

The meal was good, except I think I got Nadered with the crappy side dish.

which is precisely what each of these polls mean. Also, whoever thinks Nader is going to get five percent is a fool.

forget polls till fall.

the only significance is that all these supposed silver bullets that you guys are counting on to kill Bush will not happen.

Kerry needs to project his vision. Hopefully he will at some point or its all over.