In 2004 did you know that John Kerry might very well lose to Bush?

[Douglas Carpenter]

I ask this because it appears most Republicans from the grassroots up to the Senior most advisers and Romney and Ryan themselves were and still are in a state of shock that they lost. It confounds me that they didn't even seem to have anticipated the possibility of losing - even though the polls, the non-partisan statisticians, the financial derivative markets and just about everyone else saw Obama as having a strong advantage.

IN 2004 the consensus of expert opinion really did see it as a toss-up. But a toss-up of course means that we might lose and the other side might win.

40 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Yes, I was well aware that Bush might win reelection in 2004
	31 (78%)
	No, was shocked that Kerry lost - That was totally unexpected
	7 (18%)
	other
	2 (5%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[NRaleighLiberal]

1. As much as I liked Kerry as a person, I didn't see him as a can't miss candidate,

and thought that BushRoveCheney could possibly be "up to something", seeing what they did in 2000.

[Le Taz Hot]

55. Oh, please.

Rove doesn't even know we exist.

[PowerToThePeople]

2. other, Dean scream killed my choice. n/t

[Blue_In_AK]

3. I dared to dream that he would win,

but given what happened in 2000, I had my doubts. I was so depressed.

[politicasista]

52. It's just weird to see people attacking him

from being a ABB candidate to not using social media right. Guess Senate work doesn't count anymore.

[Drunken Irishman]

4. AS much as I wanted Kerry to win, it was clear he was the underdog throughout...

There was a point, around July, where I felt confident, from August through to election day, I was very nervous and never really liked his chances. The polls just were not favorable to him and even though some kept telling me not to believe the polls because Bush was not above 50% in most of 'em and needed to be to be reelected, I couldn't get over the fact that Kerry just seemed to be one step behind Bush throughout the last leg of the election.

I will say that I had hope on election day with all the exit polls ... but then was nervous when I noticed Kerry was up like 20 points in Pennsylvania. That made absolutely no sense to me, so, I suspected maybe the exit polls were off.

[karynnj]

26. My view was so like yours, I don't have to write anything

other than to asy the 50% nonsense drove me nuts. I looked at recent races and there was NO President anywhere near 50% - they were either above it or pretty far below it - in the low 40s or otherwise. The 50% number was simply intuitive, but with no data in that range, there was no statistical justification for the statement. In addition, there were people like Pat Buchanan, an isolationist, who clearly would not "approve" ... but who never in a million years would vote for Kerry.

[Hippo_Tron]

32. He got almost no convention bounce and the Swift Boat liars ended him

I wanted Kerry to win badly, but the fact is that his message was mostly about Bush being privileged brat who sends poor peoples' kids to war and ducked military service himself. That was great for mobilizing the base, but it's just something that didn't get enough of the middle to vote for him.

[Rex]

5. After the Ohio theft, I knew we would lose.

What I couldn't believe, was that after 4 years they were still cheating and getting away with it.

[Squinch]

6. In this 2012 election. the electoral college vote was NEVER close.

These people are just astonishingly stupid, or have been made astonishingly ignorant by Fox. Or both. There is NO other explanation.

And I believe that Romney was truly stunned by his loss. There are only two possibilities for this: HE is astonishingly stupid, or he thought the fix was in. I give either a 50/50 chance of being correct.

[Bucky]

7. I was cautiously optimistic, but I knew Kerry was far from a perfect candidate.

And Bush's crew was run by far from honorable men.

[democraticinsurgent]

8. Both Shocked and Not Surprised

The battleground state polling (as I remember it) indicated that Kerry should eke out a win. The early exit polling bore that out, but then the late night "red shift" vote theft wiped out wins in not only Ohio but other states as well, along with several close Senate races.

So...not surprised because we knew it would be close. But shocked when the exit polls and early vote tabulation were turned upside down.

[tabbycat31]

9. I did not

However, I know a lot more about politics now than I do then (I was 24 and had just woken up politically, now at 32 I am a campaign staffer).

AS a campaign staffer, I know how races are going.

[OKNancy]

10. I knew when he was nominated he would lose

[OKNancy]

70. LOL - boy have you got me wrong

I am a pragmatist. I love Kerry. But in 2004, with war fever still hot, and trying to beat an incumbent... he was just not going to win.

[politicasista]

81. You are right

Went back and deleted the post. Probably not the most well liked poster right now, so sincerest apologies for the over the top post. Peace.

[Scuba]

11. I expected Kerry to lose.

[Johonny]

12. 9 months after Kerry lost polling showed he would have won easy

It simply took a little more than 4 years for most Americans to get sick of Bush politics. However once they got sick of them boy did they get sick of them. That was a painful 4 years. It was 4 years of watching people die stupidly in wars, pretend torture was a great idea, that Katrina was totally impossible to deal with...

Personally I couldn't understand how anyone could reelect Bush, but luckily now the vast majority of Americans agree with me. Not in time to prevent the 2nd term, but enough that his sorry * can't see daylight except in very comfortable surroundings. 4 years from now I doubt Obama will end the same way.

[Douglas Carpenter]

13. McGovern would have beat Nixon if the election had been in November of 73. Mondale would have beat

Reagan if the election had been in November of 83. Timing is an awfully big factor

[PETRUS]

14. Interesting point about the post-Presidency.

Hell, Bush could get himself arrested in some places.

[JI7]

40. Katrina happened AFTER the 04 election, i think that was what really woke people up

that something like that happened in our country. that those things aren't supposed to happen here.

[politicasista]

45. +1 n/t

[Johonny]

80. but he was tanking bad even before that

He started his second term declaring he now had capital and was going to privatize social security. His "lets privatize S.S." lasted about 3 months. It had no momentum. It turns out no one was interested in it. I turned out he had no capital. Apparently all those supporters that post "I'm not sorry" photograph were actually sorry. The 2004 election had a lot of spite voters that were sick of hearing about the sour grapes of 2000. But apparently it never occurred to them that Bush thought their vote was capital that the country needed HUGE change. By the summer Bush was already checking out. Then Katrina happened and once again the total fail that was the government infrastructure built around butt kissing and party loyalty couldn't deal with it. You wonder where the "I'm not sorry" people are today? Because we know they were eventually sorry

[LadyHawkAZ]

15. CNN is still calling it a tie

but it seems Bush has a slight edge.



Yes, I knew. I didn't want to admit it, but all the signs were there.

[HopeHoops]

16. Other. Kerry didn't lose. The shrub was re-appointed.

[politicasista]

30. You would think people bashing him and praising Obama

in the same sentence would get that, but they don't.

[democrattotheend]

17. I thought it could go either way, but in hindsight, I was too naive

My mom saw the writing on the wall the last few days. She felt that the momentum was going toward Bush and she was right. Looking back, I should have seen it too. I was surprised when I looked back at polls recently, it seemed clear that Bush was going to win. Narrowly, but he was going to win. Ironically, looking back at those polls was comforting this year, because it convinced me that it is possible for an incumbent who leads only narrowly in the polls to win.

In many ways, this election bore similarities to 2004, with the parties reversed. But I hope and believe that the similarities ended on Election Night. Obama will probably not become unpopular in his second term the way Bush did, because he is a much better leader and he's good in a crisis and if anything, I think he could become more popular and more effective now that he doesn't have to win reelection. At least I hope so.

[Douglas Carpenter]

18. some mroe results?

[stuntcat]

19. I was shocked

My opinion of humanity's been declining, on a very steep slope, ever since 2000. It is proven to me over and over every day why I'm right about us and our future. The election of Obama twice has been one of the few things to give me a twinge of hope.

In 2004 I still had enough hope in people that they'd vote Bush out. The Dirty Evil is right there in his eyes, and the fact that my fellow citizens elected him not once but twice just makes me glad I'm 42 and that I never had a baby, especially a daughter.

Do I sound over-dramatic? I hope you'll all get back to me in 2050, telling how wrong I was about how we're agreeing to F### the life out of our only little planet.

[politicasista]

20. Doesn't matter. He will always punching bag for the peanut gallery

at DU and social media. Plain and simple.

It doesn't matter what Kerry does, it matters what he didn't do when it mattered.

[eissa]

22. I was stunned

Maybe I was just naive and overly optimistic, but I just couldn't accept that this country would elect shrub. If the worst they could hurl at Kerry was that he was a Frenchman from the non-American northeast who regretted his vote for war, well I thought it paled in comparison to shrub's incompetence. I took that loss HARD.

[RobertEarl]

27. I know Kerry didn't lose

I never expected him to lose. I didn't think America would stand for the theft.

As for the flabbergasted WHN (what's his name) supporters who thought WHN was gonna win, they were told by fox WHN was gonna win and they believed?

[dsc]

28. Kerry was trying to thread a very narrow needle

and anyone with any sense had to think it was possible he would lose. He had to win either Florida or Ohio to win and he was ahead in OH but by less than 1% and behind in Florida. I will admit that when the exit polls were leaked I felt he had won and thus was surprised to see him lose but even then I knew it was possible the exit polls were wrong.

[Hippo_Tron]

29. I was predicting a repeat of Florida 2000 as the most likely scenario

I thought Kerry's chances were about 50/50 at the time and knowing substantially more about politics than I did then, that was extremely optimistic. His chances were closer to 20 to 30% at best. Romney's were no better.

Romney's campaign was a right wing echo chamber totally disengaged from reality. That's how he actually believed that the President didn't call the Benghazi incident as an act of terror.

[Coyotl]

31. I knew the polls favored Kerry to a degree

with plenty of margin for error in polling, I thought. Polling seems better today.

[Xyzse]

33. I knew it was a tight race. I thought that there was a chance Kerry could win

Still, I was upset with the voter irregularities in Ohio and in Florida, and I kept abreast with what was going on in the Black Box matters.

I thought Kerry should have waited a bit longer before conceding. Particularly as the electoral votes were pretty close and dependent mostly on Ohio and Florida which both had questionable activities going on.

So, yeah, I had the idea that Bush might win, but still was shell-shocked thinking that I can't believe people could be so dumb. I was younger then, and a bit more naive thinking that people can reason things out. I was obviously wrong.

[politicasista]

34. delete.

point clarified below

[Xyzse]

35. I don't blame Kerry

I feel like he was being a gentleman while being abused by both his party and the Republicans.

I think he was the one candidate for President that I strongly supported and believed in.

[politicasista]

36. Should have rephrased that differently

Apologies.

Guess just sick of the bashing of this decent man in an effort to make Obama, B. Clinton, and everyone else look like political geniuses.

Same with Gore, but Kerry gets it more because he "lost." We can praise Obama's political talents without tearing down his predecessors.

Probably ruined a lot of threads on this and others in the last 24 hours so apologies for the over the top posts. Peace.

[Xyzse]

37. No worries

[politicasista]

43. Thanks n/t

[ibegurpard]

38. Of course I did

If the country could have elected him once I could certainly see they would do it again. (and despite what anyone says about stolen elections and fraud, which may or may not be true, there were plenty of people who were just fine with Bush).

[LaydeeBug]

39. Two words: Ken Blackwell. <<<<-------yep. we knew. nt

[Proud Liberal Dem]

41. I had the general sense that Kerry would (likely) not win

I hoped he would win but the writing was on the wall towards the end, specifically that Bush would eke out a small win. Bush and his policies may have been very unpopular but he had the media shilling for him 24-7-365 and 9/11 was still fresh in many people's minds and Bush was able to play upon that- as well as the specious notion that he could protect the country better than Kerry- to make people concerned enough about the idea of "switching horses". Plus, he just wasn't the strongest candidate that we could have had. The "Anybody but _______" strategy, unless the candidate has a certain kind of personality/charism, unfortunately, just isn't usually enough to win an election, which is why I felt reasonably certain that Romney would be an unsuccessful candidate this year. Little did I know just how ineptly he ran his campaign, however. As weak as Kerry's campaign seemed to be, he was at least able to make it close. Romney got washed out, winning only two states that President Obama won in 2008 (which were difficult ones to hold on to).

[politicasista]

42. Interesting

So those crowds all showed up for someone who was weak. They were just only there to see The Boss, Big Dog Clinton and Edwards.

Still haven't got an answer to this question:

If Kerry was so bad and ABB, what motivated people to show up for someone who was so wooden, boring, and uncharismatic?

What movtivated all those parents to allow someone that was aloof to hold or be around their kids?

Why Democrats keep eating our own and throwing them under the bus to praise the brilliance of other Dems is mind boggling.

Guess it's just cool to ridicule Dems we don't like in favor of Dems we do like.

[politicasista]

53. Kick n/t

[Proud Liberal Dem]

78. Whoa!

I did't say (or I didn't think I was saying) that Kerry was an awful candidate/person and I proudly cast my vote for him in 2004 but I wasn't nearly as enthusiastic about him as I have been about President Obama. The question of the OP is whether or not we thought that it was possible that Kerry might lose and that is what I was responding to. The Bush campaign ended up enjoying a lot of advantages, as well as running an effective, if mean-spirited and nasty, campaign. In the end, Kerry came up a bit short in the charisma/campaign department IMHO and it cost him the election, albeit not by much- and definitely not as much as Romney came up short against President Obama this year. And I'm pretty sure that at least some people were voting against Bush and not so much for Kerry, which doesn't necessarily minimize his positive attributes but I think that this is what happened, at least with some people.

We might disagree but we can disagree without being disagreeable, right?

[Awsi Dooger]

44. That was the 99.99% election on DU

Everyone rips the GOP unskewers while ignoring that it happened here.

Everything pointed to Bush, from the situational variables to economic data to war time. Mark Mellman wrote a very astute article on election eve describing that we simply do not oust incumbents under those circumstances.

Here, the mood was generally giddy. My Excel model forecast Bush unless I turned up the undecideds to 62% in favor of Kerry. I knew that was too damn high based on a tight polarized race with a defined challenger, but I got caught up in Bush hatred and thought it might happen. My betting friends in Las Vegas were literally laughing at me, saying I was going against everything I knew to be correct, like the advantages of an incumbent with his party in power only one term.

I remember experimenting on election eve and when I turned down the undecideds to 54 or 55% to Kerry, Bush won by almost exactly where the final electoral and popular margins ended up.

On DU my 62% was comparatively very low, and mocked by others who preferred 75% and up. Hence the 99.99%.

[Ter]

46. Is there any way to see an archive of DU the day before the election?

I was just a lurker at the time, so I don't recall. At the time though, I thought Bush had a 60-40 chance of winning.

Now, what did everyone think the day before the election in 2000? I thought Bush would win, and was shocked it was so close.

[joshcryer]

51. Found some posts:

Not exactly Nov 2 but before then:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1223785

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x659117

Nov 2:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1281210

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x748

Hard to find posts.

[Awsi Dooger]

58. That final link was during the early exit poll frenzy

DU was exploding in certainty of a Kerry win. A night earlier there was considerable confidence mixed by warnings that we were getting carried away.

BTW, Bush was a -160 (5/8) betting favorite. That number basically didn't move the entire cycle.

Four years earlier against Gore, Bush was -180 (5/9) on election eve and it jumped to -220 (5/11) before the betting closed.

[politicasista]

60. And we continue to riducule Kerry anyway

Just wondering what has Kerry done to Obama and Democrats. Really.

[joshcryer]

62. Who is ridiculing Kerry?

Facts = ridicule?

[politicasista]

64. People in this thread and other threads

Except the facts are not the truth. Not calling out anyone or a thread.

Everything 2003/04 from Iraq - Ohio to just being a ______ candidate, and surrogate work now. All just to praise Obama, and make him, Clinton, Biden and "stronger" Dems look like political geniuses.

To be fair, they probably did this to Gore. I don't remember I didn't vote until 04, but it seems ten times worse when it comes to Kerry.

As said before, maybe it's all the SOS rumors, the DNC speech last Sept, debate prep, and him being out there for Obama and Democrats that is strring up the ridicule.

So far, not one person outside the DU Kerry group can answer for Candidate Kerry. If he was so weak, ABB, and nobody wanted/liked him, how and why did he get the large crowds? For someone that was labeled as weak, wooden, boring, and uncharismatic, those people had a reason for coming out to see him besides seeing Edwards, B. Clinton, Springsteen, etc.

I am probably to most annoying poster now, but it's not out of attention seeking. Just trying to understand what's up with all the badmouthing of Senator Kerry to make Obama and others look brilliant. I don't get. I don't.

Please help pol understand.

[joshcryer]

65. You wrote, to another poster, "and we continue rediculing Kerry."

The poster you responded to did not ridicule Kerry.

I don't care, you support Kerry, you are welcome to be as supportive as you want, I don't mind it. I see some posters warrant being told that they're ridiculing Kerry, just not that poster you responded to. Calling it the polls a "frenzy" might've been a bit ridiculing, but that is ridiculing people who had high expectations, not Kerry.

I wonder what your deleted post to me was about to be honest. I had to leave DU over the Dean/Kerry rift. I think I posted all of 10 times after Dean was kicked out. I don't really know how things were. The last post of mine I can find here was Oct. 31 where I pointed out a Zogby poll that put Kerry leading in the youth demographic. I honestly wasn't here that much.

[politicasista]

67. It wasn't appropriate

It was a sarcastic comment about throwing Kerry under the bus at POTUS expense. It was a reply about Kerry not taking Dean's social network approach that made Obama successful, though Kerry is tweeting more.

Guess just sick of the hate (It may not be ridicule, but that's how I see it) towards a decent Democrat/Liberal that actually does productive things. That' s progress and integrity. Not talking about here at DU, but in social media land.

Yes it really bad (if not worse) with Obama, but at least some (not all) supporters of the POTUS could at least show some respect toward Senator Kerry without badmouthing him at Obama's expense. That make O look bad, not good.

Sorry you had to leave during the Dean/Kerry rifts. That probably topped or didn't top the Obama/Hillary rifts.

[JI7]

66. a lot of your posts seem to attack people for no reason

i don't know why you keep obsessing about this.

[politicasista]

68. Not attacking anyone. Just want to understand.

It is not fair or right.

Just would like to see decent folks get some appreciation, respect due and be relevant, but guess that's isn't a big deal anymore.

[joshcryer]

49. After the "Dean scream" killed Dean's chances I knew it was going to be rough.

Dean had a massive online social media presence (before Facebook or MySpace there was Friendster, which Dean dominated). I predicted that if Kerry did not adopt Dean's social media presence that he would falter. That is indeed what happened.

While Dean was never ahead in the delegate count and he ran a shitty ground campaign, it still remains a fact that his social media approach was not adopted by a Presidential candidate until Obama in 2008. As far as I see it if you're going to win a US Presidential election you must dominate social media, this is more true today.

[Le Taz Hot]

54. Yes, by the complete LACK of support

he had here in CA. The national party came down and cajoled and threatened until they were blue. NOBODY in CA wanted him. He was shoved down our throats by the national party.

[Mr.Turnip]

61. Yes, because the polls were really close, quite a bit closer than this election on the state level.

[Fearless]

63. He is a traditional politician in an age of tv politics.

It was 50-50 to me.

[gravity]

69. DUers are now lying to themselves.

I can't speak for everyone, but I was surprised when Bush won in 2004. Not to say that I never thought Bush could win, but I always thought Kerry as being favored to win.

Looking back I can see that Bush was favored in the polls, but at the time, I thought Kerry would pull it off. Sure Kerry was not the best candidate, but Bush was a complete idiot. The undecideds would break towards him in the end and Americans can't be possibly that stupid and vote for Bush again.

Hindsight is always 20/20. It is easy looking back and saying that you acted rationally, but a lot of us bought into the hype at the time.

[PATRICK]

71. I felt in 2004 the same as 2012

except that Kerry as a challenger had a long road to hoe, was vulnerable, STAYED vulnerable to the same character assassination and lies used against Obama and could not counter anything enough, including fraud. In retrospect compared to Obama's campaign it is apparent he was doomed. Keeping it "close" as in 2000 was quite an achievement when losing the game on all levels dominated by the GOP rules.

Just because some of this might sound like the feeble minded angst ridden blame fantasies of the GOP as in all things regarding the two parties it is almost the opposite. Kerry did win, would have won convincingly with anything like a fair media. They crusaded against Gore, dismissed Kerry and now are shamefully discredited by Obama.

I was not shocked about the election. I was prepared when I heard Kerry's dismissive attitude to the last ditch cheating line of the GOP which mirrored his dismissal of the his old Swift Boat foes. The party's certainty about gaining majorities is well founded, even if not well earned or defended. In everything else they seem kind of naive up against the plutocrat entitled pranksters who have definitely proved they not only are morally deficient but not that bright either. "Triumph of the Will" is a galling film about a big loser, self-suicide not an emotional high to emulate. It is still the only thing that moves the typical GOPer, a void filled with the glory of dominating. But the decent people, even the best don't seem to get it either. Hence the constant drama imbued with human absurdity.

[Le Taz Hot]

72. Feel free to go back into DU's archives and check.

My assessment of him hasn't changed.

[NoPasaran]

73. I was totally confident that Kerry would win

While I suppose that in the back of my mind I knew that he might lose, the thought of Bush being re-elected was so horrifying that I could not accept it. And while I try not to live and die for polls, I was surrounded by people both in real life and online explaining that while the polls showed Kerry a few points behind, he was actually a few points ahead. So election night was shattering, stunning. But I had a good cry and got over it.

[clyrc]

74. I knew that Bush got away with stealing the election in 2000

and there were no consequences. I had hopes for Kerry, but I was not shocked to hear that there were voting problems again. Why wouldn't there be? Even if Bush legitimately won the second election, I wasn't so surprised because, well. People can be stupid.

[MelungeonWoman]

75. As soon as the words, "reporting for duty" came out of his lips...

I knew it was over for Kerry at the convention when he chose to make Vietnam the central theme of his campaign. By that time the SBVfT had been organized as a 501C for six months.

I also knew Gore wasn't going to run again as soon as I saw him in that hot tub!

[barbtries]

76. i still believe that Kerry won in 2004.

the republicans stole the election via Ohio

i had to go with shocked in the poll but would have preferred another option, that i expected Kerry to win but knew it could go either way. still, i did not think gw would win and i'm STILL saying he didn't.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

77. Well, in 2004, I went to sleep, couldn't even bear to watch the results come in.

In 2012 I was really nervous but I forced myself to sit there and watch the returns. I guess that says something maybe?

[bigdarryl]

79. YEP!!! it was an easy call all you had to do is look how the 13keys were lined up

Lichtman predicted a Bush win in 2003 before Kerry was even the nominee as he did in this last election.