I heard that the Undecides go for the Incumbent in Presidential...

PROGRESSIVE1

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 12:42 AM
Original message

I heard that the Undecides go for the Incumbent in Presidential...

Elections and that they only go for the challenger in lower races (i.e. Governor, Senator, etc). Is this true?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

troublemaker

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 12:45 AM
Response to Original message

1. They broke late for Reagan1980 and Dole1996 aginst incumb Pres

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Born Free

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 04:30 AM
Response to Reply #1

18. undecided voters deserve no respect

These people are the most politically ignorant of Americans and yet the media treats them like they are great thinkers. Anyone that has not seen the differences between the two candidate this time and can not decide if America is on the right track, have not been paying attention.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Dookus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 12:45 AM
Response to Original message

2. Not that I've ever heard

I've heard pretty consistently that they break 70% for the challenger. I never heard it said of only lower races.

It makes sense, too. If you're still undecided about Bush after 3.75 years in office, there's probably little he can do to persuade you at the last minute.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DaveinMD

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 12:45 AM
Response to Original message

3. no

not true at all. The 1980 race was a dead heat one week out. Undecideds broke for Clinton in 92 and Dole in 96.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Ediacara

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 12:45 AM
Response to Original message

4. No, not normally

Undecideds almost always go for the challenger 2:1 or 3:1, although during world war 1 and 2, they tended to go to the incumbant, and there is an argument that now, "in a time of war," they'll go to Bush. I think the logic is spurious, as the war we're in is not comparable to the world wars.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

gatorboy

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #4

7. I agree. I'm getting tired of being told we are at war.

A war that can never end doesn't count. Unless the morons assume we are keeping Bush forever. Besides, terror is a tactic and there's no way you can beat that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Mayberry Machiavelli

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 04:17 AM
Response to Reply #7

17. Yeah. "It's WW III, but keep shopping at Neiman-Marcus, and buying

Edited on Thu Sep-02-04 04:17 AM by Mayberry Machiavelli

those HumVees and burning that gas. No need for a draft here even though we are involuntarily conscripting those who had previously volunteered."

Bush may or may not be a flip flopper, but he certainly is a flop.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

coloradodem2005

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 12:46 AM
Response to Original message

5. That is not what I heard.

I think they break for the challenger in Pres. elections more often than incumbents. They have had nearly 4 years to make up their minds and accept the incumbent. If they are still undecided, they must not like the incumbent very much. So, they want to see something better in the challenger.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

The Velveteen Ocelot

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 12:47 AM
Response to Original message

6. No.

They normally break for the challenger. http://www.cookpolitical.com/column/2004/081004.php

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

tritsofme

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 12:53 AM
Response to Original message

8. What undecideds?

I believe that by the time the final late October/early November polls are conduncted there will be no undecideds to speak of, and the rest will be statistical noise.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Booster

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 12:55 AM
Response to Original message

9. Maybe if the incumbent has been a decent President,

but I don't think they will in this case. If the religious crap doesn't scare them to vote for someone/anyone else, then Bush's record should. All you have to ask them is "what has he done?" and even my strong Republican mother got stumped with that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemDogs

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 01:08 AM
Response to Original message

10. Just the opposite.

They know everything about him already. If more than 50% don't like him now (and they don't), the only way he gets their vote is if the alternative is even worse. Makes their strategy make sense, doesn't it?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

vetwife

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 01:20 AM
Response to Reply #10

11. If that was true...the rules got changed thanks to Zell tonight !

BWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWAh !

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Yupster

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 02:04 AM
Response to Original message

12. I heard that guy tonight too

I've never heard that before though. I'd tend to doubt it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

fujiyama

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 02:17 AM
Response to Original message

13. I suppose

it's true in some cases, but I think this election will be more difficult to judge. The administration has the fear card to play now so it depends on what kinda stuff they try to pull at the end.

Also October surprises could change this stuff. In '00, the Bush DUI story did have some impact with undecided voters.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Z-E-R-0

(44 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 02:36 AM
Response to Original message

14. Trippi Said That Tonight On MSNBC

I thought the exact opposite was true.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Feanorcurufinwe

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 02:41 AM
Response to Original message

15. Trippi's on crack

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Gore1FL

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 02:53 AM
Response to Original message

16. It is the opposite, actually

Undecideds don't usually support, or are generally unsatisfied with the incumbant (or they wouldn't be undecided). If the challenger can sway them a bit, they usually fall into his camp.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

MaineDem

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 07:08 AM
Response to Original message

19. A Wall St Journal writer said last night...

Edited on Thu Sep-02-04 07:15 AM by MaineDem

that the GOP has given up on the undecideds. He said they're now just trying to strengthen their base.

I couldn't believe it! We now have to make sure we get those undecideds to vote because, if they go to the polls, chances are they'll vote for Kerry. Our GOTV efforts have to be huge!

Edited for typo.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

djg21

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-02-04 07:35 AM
Response to Original message

20. Break ussually favors challnger 75:25

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Sat May 04th 2024, 06:10 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.