Skip to comments.Kerry Would Beat (Jeb) Bush In 2008
Posted on 12/20/2004 8:10:43 AM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
Massachusetts senator John Kerry could win the presidency in 2008, according to a poll by Opinion Dynamics released by Fox News. 45 per cent of respondents would vote for the 2004 Democratic nominee in a head-to-head contest against Republican Florida governor Jeb Bush.
In other prospective elections, New York senator and former first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton leads three Republicans: Floridas Bush, Tennessee senator Bill Frist and New York governor George Pataki.
Rodham Clinton was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 2000, defeating Republican Rick Lazio by 12 per cent. She ruled out a presidential bid in 2004.
Other high-profile Republicans who may run for office in 2008such as former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani and Arizona senator John McCainwere not included in the survey. Current president George W. Bush is constitutionally barred from seeking a third term in office.
Thinking ahead to the next presidential election, if the 2008 presidential election were held today and the candidates were (insert choices here), for whom would you vote?
John Kerry (D) 45% - 37% Jeb Bush (R)
Hillary Rodham Clinton (D) 40% - 33% Bill Frist (R)
Hillary Rodham Clinton (D) 41% - 35% George Pataki (R)
Hillary Rodham Clinton (D) 46% - 35% Jeb Bush (R)
I believe Fox's tracking poll was the only one that had Kerry beating Bush this time. They are even worse then Zogby.
Here we go with polls again. I guess we still haven't learned our lesson about Americans. And this is so meaningless, it's meaningless. :)
More koolaid please!
I was not aware that Jeb Bush was going to be running for President in 2008. Besides...a lot can happen in four years, before the next Presidential Election, for instance, John Kerry might have an allergic reaction to Botox...then where would he be????
I would NOT vote for Jeb (nepotism) or Pataki (RINO).
A big thanks to FOX News for figuring this out. Now the Republican Party can save all of its fundraising money for 2008 and use it to focus on the 2010 congressional elections.
One more thing, John Kerry would still not be able to carry Jesusland (Michael's Moore's word for those states that voted for Bush) in 2008.
Jeb's not running anyway.
I thought we were done with polls until at least January 20. Guess I was wrong.
And what the heck is this? Jeb has said he's not running in 2008. This is an even more meaningless poll.
An 8% loss to Kerry. LoL!
Swiftvets won't let Kerry win. He's toast. And on-the-records made by Hillary are going to get in her way in 2008.
How would that be nepotism? If he won the primaries it would be because he got more delegates not because his last name is Bush. I think it is all esoteric because he will not run.
There is an assumption that these folks will not have passed on!
And in 4 years that pukey horse face will get even uglier if you can imagine that...
He'd be running against the Swift Boat Veterans and POWs for Truth.
What does the general public know about ANY of those Republican "candidates"? John Kerry had a huge national campaign, and while no one knows what his policies are about, they at least know who he is.
Pollster: "Kerry or Frist?"
Pollee: (Thinking: I know who Kerry is, but what is a Frist?) "Kerry"
Well, here's to Kerry giving it another go.
These are the same type of polls that had a "generic" Democrat beating George W. Bush earlier this year.
People are always going to pick the out of power party in these types of polls until actual lines are drawn and it is for real.
Unless we know the makeup of the respondants to this (and all polls), this information is way less than worthless, but will be trumpeted as major news in the mainstream press. For instance, If you have 1000 respondants, and its not a 500/500 split, the information isn't a true representation of reality and is therefore worthless. But then again, the mainstream press hasnt been concerned with reality in a long time, only in foistering the support of a radical agenda on the rest of us.
By '08 all these losers are going to be miraculously transformed into BIG winners . . . Yeah, right. By next year I'm going to be 20 lbs. lighter and jogging 5 miles every day. Lots of wishful resolutions at this time of year.
We're doomed, doomed I tell ya!
If the next Presidential Election were held today, 46% of voters would vote for a generic Republican candidate over Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton. A Rasmussen Reports survey found that 39% of voters would cast their ballot for Senator Clinton.
Of course Kerry is up over Jeb in polls taken right now--people outside of Florida know little about Jeb Bush except who his family is. Kerry just ran for president, so on name and face recognition alone he has an advantage over Jeb, who hasn't been trying to get noticed around the nation. What a silly poll.
I was listening on the radio and there was a story about how much people donated to what party. I believe something like 60% of fox news people donated to democrats.
These fluff polls are to unite the hard core and keep them from running off to join other parties.
(seriously the Green party should be recruiting overtime)
What about Hillary against Condi???
Please tell which of the 51% that voted for Bush in 2004 is going to vote for these DEM losers in 2008
The only hope the dems have is they refine their fraud techniques and that the colleges turn out enough new brain washed dumb downed boobs
Or that Hillary goes far enough to the right to DUPE some CC types
I agree. It is way too early for this.
I am sure Al Gore would have been way ahead of GWB in a 1996 poll. And, he lost.
The OD poll is done by a big time leftist by what I understand.
Wasn't there a point either in late 1999 or early 2000 where Bush had a huge lead?
Since the Civil War, the only men to be nominated and win after losing a previous election are Grover Cleveland and Richard Nixon--and Cleveland is a special case since he was a former President who had been defeated in a close election while getting more popular votes than the winner.
Kerry might want to encourage speculation about a possible second try to enhance his standing in the party, and to discourage Teresa from thinking of dumping him. If he were to win in 2008, he would be the third-oldest President ever at his inauguration (after Reagan and William Henry Harrison).
This is nonsense. Hillary will never win even against the physically unattractive McCain. Hillary physically looks like a well fed Teletubby. Appearence is so important.
Men will never let Hillary win or anyone for that matter within the next 100 years. Also men loving hetero women would not let this happen. A Teletubby as president of a superpower.. unlikely.
The results here aren't necessarily popularity, but more based on name recognition. John Kerry just spent two years building up great name recognition, and Hillary has more than she could ever want. Bill Frist and George Pataki are still only well known names to political junkies and the people they represent in Tennessee and New York. And, I think the fact that, other than the residents of Florida, the most people know about Jeb Bush is who his father and brother are, that wouldn't shouldn't be taken as gospel either. Lots of flaws with these polls. I'd actually be interested in seeing "generic Republican" vs. "generic Democrat" right now.
Get real. The key word is vote. We vote for our leaders and if the majority voted for Jeb it would not be a monarchy or a dictatorship. You see we would still have three branches of government.
Donald Duck(Disney) 100% - John Kerry(Commie) 0%
Mickey Mouse(Disney) 100% - Hillary Klinton(Commie) 0%
Some shmoe chosen at random 100% - Hillary Klinton(Commie) 0%
Why? Were the pollsters afraid of seeing Hillary or Kerry 20 points behind "high profile" Republicans?
why would we want a 3rd bush?
this country rebelled against england to rid itself of royalty .
as it is, 2 bushes and 2 clintons will amount to 28 years of my life.
As a resident of Florida, Jeb has been a great governor and, in all honesty, would have been a better President than Dubya IMO.
Asking how two very famous names will run against three people who are probably unknown to most of the respondents (except that Jeb Bush has a recognizable last name) makes little sense. Hillary Clinton has enormous name recognition. John Kerry has had enormous publicity from the MSM for the past year. Pataki is known only in New York. Most people never heard of Frist, who keeps a low profile. Jeb Bush is at most a face and a name.
In other words, this is completely meaningless.
What will count is what people learn when some candidate actually runs. For instance, Pataki is a do-nothing governor, has made New York into an economic disaster area even worse than Mario Cuomo left it, and favors partial-birth abortion. In other words, the more they learn about Pataki, the less they will like him.
Frist would do better, but doesn't have the guts or the fire to win.
Jeb Bush would be a magnificent candidate. But will people vote for a third man from the same family?
CAN I VOTE FOR NO POLLS TILL 2005 PLEASE?!!!
It's hard to find any poll that isn't leftist until the day before Election Day. Then they've got to protect their reputation.
The latest polls show the child of Jenna Bush beating the child of Chelsea Clinton by 63% to 37% if the 2052 Presidential election were held today.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.