Bush approval at 45%! CBS poll...

[wyldwolf]

http://www.iht.com/articles/527088.html

[coloradodem2005]

1. Let's see if we can get it down to the high 30's.

[Lucky Luciano]

2. or low 30s!!! nt

[mvd]

21. I think we can get it down to 30%

At that point, his rabid base might prevent further decline.

[BurtWorm]

4. We don't have to do a damn thing.

The Bush boy's doing it all for us. :toast:

[gratuitous]

8. Maybe we don't HAVE to

But let's work our butts off anyway to ensure a Democratic landslide. Just for the fun of it, you understand.

[oasis]

11. We have to work for a landslide to keep this election from being stolen.

[BurtWorm]

19. Maybe I should clarify: We don't have to do a damn thing

to get Bush's numbers down. He'll do that all by himself. But of course that doesn't mean we don't have to do a damn thing to make sure his boily ass is kicked back to Crawford in time for the next Super Bowl.

[testing123]

24. I want a landslide

Let's work on a landslide.

[mvd]

12. I think it's possible!

Much of the American public hardly knows about the real Bush misadministration.

[lancdem]

3. Actually, it's even worse

42 percent

[natrat]

5. *ush you pathetic pos

down suckah!

[louis c]

6. Here's how it goes

No incumbent President has won reelection if his job approval rating was below 50% at anytime during his election year.

No incumbent president has won reelection if his opponent was ahead this late in the election year.

Historically, the undecideds in the reelection year of an incumbent generally break at least 2-1 to the challenger. If a voter doesn't like the incumbent enough to commit to him by July, he or she is likely to select the alternative. The low percentage for a challenger was just over 60% of undecideds for McGovern in 1972. The high breakage for the undecideds was nearly 80% for Reagan in 1980.

Add to that the the high Nader number now of 6% will never be that high in November. Even in 2000, when the difference between the two major candidates was still conjecture, Nader got only 3%. As election day approaches, and voters become more aware of the stakes, there is no way Nader can top 2%. Those extra votes are Kerry's.

In addition, higher voter turnout favors Kerry. The unity of purpose favors Kerry. The energized base, as evidenced by his ability to raise record amounts of money, is to Kerry's advantage. The fact that we're "hungrier for a win" because we have no control of any branch of government is to Kerry's advantage. The anger of being cheated four years ago is to Kerry's advantage. Please, I could go on and on.

My Conservative Estimate of the 2004 Election

Electoral College
Kerry 353
Bush 185

Popular Vote
Kerry 52%
Bush 46%
Nader 2%

[bhunt70]

7. now give me the worse case scenario

what stacks up against kerry?

[benburch]

10. Vote Fraud

Massive vote fraud.

It is what they have planned.

[louis c]

15. This is the worst case scenerio.

Why do you see such panic in the Administration? Why do you think the Idiot President looks and sounds so incoherant. They can analyze the numbers the same as I can. It's over and they know it.

[louis c]

16. *

[Kurt Remarque]

9. however...

no incumbent president has previously had the capability of rigging elections

[louis c]

13. I can't factor in a fix

Remember, the presidential race is 51 seperate elections run by the states, and D.C.. It's their responsibility to keep it honest. The only place that anyone would dare try to rig the election is Florida, so that's where I'd concentrate.

[benburch]

14. Anyplace with elecronic voting machines can and will be rigged.

And how could we ever prove it?

I FULLY expect Ohio to be so rigged. Without a doubt.

[TruthIsAll]

27. They will try to fix TN, CA, MO, OH, PA

Diebold will do it for them.

[LTR]

17. What about Truman?

No incumbent President has won reelection if his job approval rating was below 50% at anytime during his election year.

No incumbent president has won reelection if his opponent was ahead this late in the election year.

Wan't Truman riding low poll numbers? Just a worst case scenario.

[louis c]

23. Truman's election

was a fluke. The polling was not yet sophisticated enough to be able to be reliable. There were four strong candidates in that race. The Socialist Henry Wallace, the Dixiecrat, Strom Thurman, as well as Dewey and Truman.

Another factor was that polling was done by telephone, and not everyone had one in 1948. In addition, because of the divided vote among the four contenders, Truman won with just 43% of the vote. Bush can't win with 43%.

[althecat]

18. so how come he got a five point bounce in the 24/6 fox poll

....(ok dumb question I know..)

[louis c]

20. Fox doesn't count

Come on. Ruppert Murdoch owned and run by Roger Ailes. Give me a break. Zogby, Rasmussen, Gallup, Quinnipuaq are somewhat reliable, especially if you take them all together and average them out.

[TruthIsAll]

28. Don't trust Gallup. Rasmussen is pure Repuke. Zogby is OK.

Gallup was very volatile week-to-week in the 2000 CNN tracking poll.

Rasmussen predicted a solid Bush win.

Zogby had it right on the money.

[TruthIsAll]

22. Bush was at 41% last month on CBS

CBS News Poll. May 20-23, 2004. N=1,113 adults nationwide. MoE
± 3 (total sample).
"Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush
is handling his job as president?"
  Approve Disapprove Don't Know 
 ALL 41 52 7   
 Republicans 77 16 7   
 Democrats 18 79 3   
 Independents 36 55 9   
 
 Trend:         
....5/11/04 44 49 7   
 4/23-27/04 46 47 8   
 3/30-01/04 49 44 7   
 3/10-14/04 51 42 7   
 2/24-27/04 47 44 9   
 2/12-15/04 50 42 8 
 



ymm	Newsw	Fox	CNN	Pew	Harris	CBS	ABC	Time	NBC	AP	Zogby	Average	Event
102	52	55	57	53	na	53	55	52	na	na	57	54.3	
103	55	56	63	56	56	53	58	55	57	na	53	56.2	
104	57	63	59	53	49	60	63	na	56	na	52	56.9	
105	57	59	53	50	59	56	55	52	na	na	52	54.8	
106	na	59	55	51	50	57	na	na	50	na	51	53.3	
107	na	56	52	52	56	na	59	55	na	na	47	53.9	
108	na	55	51	50	52	53	55	na	na	na	50	52.3	
109	86	81	87	80	na	na	86	84	82	na	82	83.5	Trifecta 9/11
110	84	80	na	84	88	89	92	89	na	na	78	85.5	
111	85	84	87	84	86	87	89	87	88	na	na	86.3	
112	82	86	86	na	82	85	89	82	85	na	81	84.2	
201	na	83	84	80	79	86	86	77	82	77	80	81.4	
202	83	81	82	78	79	84	83	na	na	na	74	80.5	
203	74	80	81	na	77	82	82	75	na	75	74	77.8	
204	71	79	76	74	75	78	79	75	74	72	69	74.7	
205	73	72	77	na	74	76	78	72	75	71	70	73.8	
206	70	74	70	70	70	71	77	70	69	na	69	71.0	
207	68	70	76	67	62	70	72	70	67	67	62	68.3	
208	61	69	68	60	63	65	69	na	na	65	na	65.0	
209	70	66	66	63	68	66	69	65	64	65	na	66.2	
210	61	65	67	na	64	66	67	61	63	63	63	64.0	
211	60	68	63	61	65	63	67	64	na	na	na	63.9	
212	na	65	64	61	64	61	66	55	na	64	64	62.7	
301	56	63	63	58	na	65	59	53	62	64	na	60.3	
302	61	57	61	54	52	59	64	62	54	58	63	58.6	
303	53	60	57	55	na	56	62	54	61	57	62	57.7	
304	71	71	70	67	70	68	71	62	62	51	54	65.2	Iraq invasion
305	65	65	69	65	na	67	71	63	71	64	61	66.1	
306	61	66	64	60	61	67	68	na	62	na	58	63.0	
307	55	60	62	58	na	66	59	55	na	60	53	58.7	
308	53	59	60	56	57	60	59	na	56	58	52	57.0	
309	52	58	52	55	na	55	56	52	na	52	45	53.0	
310	51	52	55	50	59	52	54	na	49	51	49	52.2	
311	52	52	54	50	na	54	56	52	51	52	48	52.1	
312	54	52	63	57	50	60	59	54	58	59	53	56.3	Saddam capture
401	50	58	60	56	na	50	58	54	54	56	49	54.5	
402	48	48	51	48	51	50	50	54	na	47	na	49.7	Kerry primaries
403	48	48	49	46	na	51	50	na	50	48	na	48.8	Clarke testimony
404	49	50	52	48	48	46	51	49	na	48	47	48.8	
405	42	48	47	44	na	41	47	46	47	48	42	45.2	TortureGate
406	na	48	49	48	50	42	47	na	na	48	46	47.3  Reagan Dies

ymm	Newsw	Fox	CNN	Pew	Harris	CBS	ABC	Time	NBC	AP	Zogby	Average	Event

[Don_G]

25. Try This Visual

[UTUSN]

26. THAT High? Then the REAL Numbers Must Be the Pits n/t