Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Advantage Kerry? (Flashback to 2004)
Washington Post ^ | August, 2004 | By Howard Kurtz

Posted on 09/09/2012 11:56:07 PM PDT by JohnHuang2

Roger Simon frames the question concisely:

"Last week Charlie Cook, a highly-respected non-partisan political analyst, wrote in his column for the National Journal that things are looking bad for President Bush.

"Cook's chief point is that while Kerry holds just a slim lead in some polls, there are very few undecided voters out there and that Bush realistically can expect to get no more than 25 percent of them.

"Which would mean a Kerry victory in November. Cook is not foolish enough to predict this and, of course, he includes the usual language about how things can change. But here are his concluding thoughts:

" ' . . . President Bush must have a change in the dynamics and the fundamentals of this race if he is to win a second term. The sluggishly recovering economy and renewed violence in Iraq don't seem likely to positively affect this race, but something needs to happen. It is extremely unlikely that President Bush will get much more than one-fourth of the undecided vote, and if that is the case, he will need to be walking into Election Day with a clear lead of perhaps three percentage points.' "

The Note declared the outlines of a trend last week:

"The reality is -- as amazing as this seems -- this is now John Kerry's contest to lose.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Let's see what Gallup's tracking poll is showing. It's September 10, and so far Gallup is showing a small lead for Obama, ranging from 7 points (49% to 42%) on one day, stretching to 10 points (51% to 41%) only days later. Oh, wait! That's the Gore v Bush, not Obama v Romney, contest. Sorry, my mistake. Hmmm, how did Gore ultimately make out back in 2000? I'd have to check and see, given the stunning predictive power of these September polls, dontchaknow.

So what's Gallup showing currently? Obama leading, 49% to 44%, as of Sunday (yesterday). That's after a tsunami of ritual-style adulation and homage in the media over Bill Clinton giving a speech. (Clinton even got bonus points for not raping anyone throughout the convention, especially with Hillary thousands of miles away.)

What Gallup and other pollsters aren't fully factoring in is the dismal Friday jobs report, indicating as many as 368,000 people dropping out of the work force (technically known as 'joining the Democrat Party').

Obama says the reason for the lousy job market is because Bush's still running the economy from Crawford, Texas. As Obama would put it, this jobless recovery is stamped with three proud words, Made in the U.S.A by the Bush Junta.

Don't know about you, but every poll I've seen shows the economy as the numero uno issue on voters' minds. As Joe Biden would say, everything boils down to a 3-letter word, jobs.

And there's nothing indicating the economy will magically be turning around in the next 50 days or so. So, since Obama's post-convention poll boomlet was the result of Clinton's speech, the media are now telling us Clinton's speech was the 2012 campaign's 'inflection point', that the election this November no longer boils down to jobs and the economy but will ultimately come down to Clinton's speech-making skills. Oh really? Ask yourself, what are the odds that on Election Day the economy won't be the top issue on voters' minds, but rather some speech Clinton gave in the summer? I like R/R's chances.

Anyway, that's ...
My Two Cents ...
"JohnHuang2"

1 posted on 09/09/2012 11:56:15 PM PDT by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Forgiven_Sinner; xm177e2; mercy; Wait4Truth; hole_n_one; GretchenEE; Clinton's a rapist; buffyt; ...

Monday-morning mega ping! Have a great day, y’all!


2 posted on 09/09/2012 11:57:44 PM PDT by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

I question the motives of anyone who claims to be a Romney supporter yet implies Romney’s really ahead, not to worry. Heck, he’s so far ahead he does not even need your vote so just don’t believe those polls showing Obama ahead. He’s losing BIG TIME.

Okay, so I guess their message is “no need to work harder”.

Better to play it safe and believe all polls that have Obama ahead. The worst that could happen is Romney will win in a 49 state landslide.

I would hate to think of what the results would be for those claiming that all polls showing Romney behind are lies. Move on, nothing to see here. Maybe an Obama landslide?

Play it safe. Use the data to benefit our side. Does that make sense to you?

I’m not taking any vacations anytime soon from this election. But it’s time those telling us Romney’s got it in the bag go and take one. They disturb me.

We did not win in 2004 or 2010 using that “nothing to see here” philosophy. We took all bad news seriously.


3 posted on 09/10/2012 12:01:26 AM PDT by tsowellfan (Voting for Obama/Biden is like purposely swallowing two tapeworms)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

John,

Not one analyst has considered the 2010 results, as far as I have seen.

Please correct me if I am wrong.


4 posted on 09/10/2012 12:01:38 AM PDT by Jet Jaguar (The pundits have forgotten the 2010 election.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

“”Let’s see what Gallup’s tracking poll is showing. It’s September 10, and so far Gallup is showing a small lead for Obama, ranging from 7 points (49% to 42%) on one day, stretching to 10 points (51% to 41%) only days later. Oh, wait! That’s the Gore v Bush, not Obama v Romney”””

Races with no incumbent have polls that are very unstable. Look at Gallup in 1960,68,88,2000 polls varied almost weekly. In 1968 at one point Nixon was up 15 even with Wallace in the race. He won by less than 1. Races with incumbents are more steady.


5 posted on 09/10/2012 12:24:14 AM PDT by Bobloblaw2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

There are a lot of parallels between Kerry and Romney, but that doesn’t mean Romney has no chance. A Massachusetts liberal who is a governor is slightly better than a Massachusetts liberal who was Senator.


6 posted on 09/10/2012 12:36:54 AM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsowellfan

No. Nobody suggests Romney is ahead so we shouldn’t be doing anything. At the same time, the level of panic and hysteria “Romney is a loser” or “Romney wants to lose” hit all time high simply because Obama gets his post-convention bounce that it’s good to have a reminder that the sky is not yet falling.


7 posted on 09/10/2012 12:38:59 AM PDT by paudio (Post-racial society: When we can legitimately hire and fire a Black man without feeling guilty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: paudio
"it’s good to have a reminder that the sky is not yet falling."

Polls Smools.
Remember at this same point in time JIMMAH was way ahead or Ronnie.
We all know how that one turned out. . . . . .

8 posted on 09/10/2012 1:44:14 AM PDT by DeaconRed (My vote in Nov will be dictated by my extreme hatred for ZERO and what he is doing to our country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
ritual-style adulation delightful wordsmithing. That Clinton is the elder statesman of the Democratic Party tells you all you need know about that criminal organization.
9 posted on 09/10/2012 2:59:12 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Charlie Cook, a highly-respected non-partisan political analyst

Why is Charlie Cook so revered by the press as such a political whiz to be respected? This isn't the first time I have seen him so highly regarded in an article while being so terribly wrong in his "analysis".

10 posted on 09/10/2012 3:15:12 AM PDT by submarinerswife (Insanity is doing the same thing over and over, while expecting different results~Einstein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

Election 2000 and 2004 were way to close for comfort. Both could easily have gone either way. It all came down to one state. If 2012 is the same, we better hope that Colorado goes Red.


11 posted on 09/10/2012 3:46:03 AM PDT by napscoordinator (Paul Ryan/Rick Santorum 2012....That would be the best scenario ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar

Not one analyst has considered the 2010 results, as far as I have seen.

Do they ever consider off years? Maybe they always just consider the last election. I am not sure but that could be a reason. Nobody was voting for President in 2010. Alot of people only vote in Presidential years and not off years.


12 posted on 09/10/2012 3:47:41 AM PDT by napscoordinator (Paul Ryan/Rick Santorum 2012....That would be the best scenario ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

From a Newsbusters article of yesterday, Sept 9:

The media are gushing and fawning over new poll numbers showing Barack Obama getting a bounce from the just ended Democratic National Convention putting him four points ahead of Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney.

Before they get too cocky, they might want to recall that after his convention ended in 1988, Democratic presidential nominee Michael Dukakis led George H.W. Bush by seventeen points

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/09/09/flashback-dukakis-led-bush-17-points-after-1988-dnc#ixzz264KHdGVg

&&&&&&

Seventeen points!! And we know how that election turned out.


13 posted on 09/10/2012 5:24:26 AM PDT by maica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: submarinerswife
Why is Charlie Cook so revered by the press as such a political whiz to be respected? This isn't the first time I have seen him so highly regarded in an article while being so terribly wrong in his "analysis".

Because Cook is their cr@p truck driver. The one that pumps the cr@p into the polls in the first place.......He might be able to neatly package the turds but it doesn't change the fact it still a pile Poo.

14 posted on 09/10/2012 5:35:08 AM PDT by thingumbob (I'm a bitter clinger...I dare you to take my gun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

This is not 1980 and demographics in Massachusetts have changed plenty but..... in 1980 nobody except maybe the Gipper himself would have thought he was going to carry Massachusetts...but he did. Politics is full of surprises. Don’t count Romney out. He’s not the best candidate but he’s all we’ve got to stop four more years of socialist demeaning of America. He can and will carry most of the battleground states.


15 posted on 09/10/2012 8:55:47 AM PDT by Combat_Liberalism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

Yep, you are so correct with your 2 cents!


16 posted on 09/10/2012 12:47:58 PM PDT by b4its2late (A Liberal is a person who will give away everything he doesn't own.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

Thanks for the ping.


17 posted on 09/11/2012 12:07:34 PM PDT by Minuteman23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
Not one analyst has considered the 2010 results, as far as I have seen.

All of the poll weighting seems to believe that party ID and turnout will be similar to 2008. I don't think that is probable. I wouldn't go as far as to suggest 2010 numbers either, but somewhere in the middle.

The analyst who correctly predicts that will win the award for closest to actual turnout.

Besides, as we saw in 2000, you can win the popular vote and lose the race, so it's really the polling in battleground states that matter, not national numbers.

18 posted on 09/11/2012 12:15:58 PM PDT by kevkrom (Those in a rush to trample the Constitution seem to forget that it is the source of their authority.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

Oh, Lordy, JH2...why are there so many serious posts in reply to such a wonderful and exquisite $.02 by you?

We need better clientele around here! lol

“Ask yourself, what are the odds that on Election Day the economy won’t be the top issue on voters’ minds, but rather some speech Clinton gave in the summer? I like R/R’s chances.”

You, and me, too, my FRiend.

I hope you are back, and plan to post more during the election. Your posts crack me up! At the same time, there is great truth to them.

From, dc2k...your greatest fan. ;o)


19 posted on 09/12/2012 11:58:15 PM PDT by dixiechick2000 (This hobbit is looking for her pitchfork...God help the GOP if I find it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson