Bush "leads" Kerry 49-48 in Missouri poll

[JI7]

<CPOD) Jun. 24, 2004 – The state of Missouri remains a key battleground in the 2004 United States presidential election, according to a poll by Zogby Interactive published in the Wall Street Journal Online. 48.6 per cent of respondents would vote for Republican incumbent George W. Bush, while 47.9 per cent would support prospective Democratic nominee John Kerry.

Independent candidate Ralph Nader garners the support of one per cent of respondents. The election is scheduled for Nov. 2.

Support for Bush remained unchanged since early June, while backing for Kerry increased by 0.3 per cent.

Bush won Missouri’s 11 electoral votes in 2000, with 50.4 per cent of all cast ballots. Aside from the 1956 presidential election, the state has picked the eventual winner in every contest since 1900>

http://www.cpod.ubc.ca/polls/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewItem&itemID=3164

[chimpymustgo]

1. 48.6% to 47.9%. Some "lead".

nt

[CO Liberal]

2. It's Within the Standard Margin of Error

So it's meaningless right now.

[Beetwasher]

6. This Is Good News!

Kerry is gaining...He was behind by a lot more in the last poll I saw...This is a dead heat now and Kerry's got Mo!

[Jack Rabbit]

3. If Kerry were leading Bush by that margin

If Kerry were leading Bush by that margin, they'd call it what it is: a statistical tie.

[GainesT1958]

4. Well, if Sen. Bill Nelson's speculation is correct...

And it is, indeed (being a supporter of Gen. Clark, gosh I hope not!) down to Gephardt and Edwards, I would point out that Mo. has 11 electoral votes, while North Carolina (where a recent Mason-Dixon Research--usually accurate in N.C. races--had Dub ahead of a Kerry/Edwards ticket by only 1%) has 15 this year. How many additional states would Gephardt bring on board, v. how many would Edwards help Kerry to carry? If THAT is a prime consideration for John Kerry and his inner circle, the answer is obvious: between those two, Edwards needs to be the choice.

B-)

[JI7]

5. mccains the only one who adds a significant amount of support to the

ticket. the reasons for gephardt and edwards has more to do with them being vetted and "safe" choices. there isn't any surprises likely to come up from their past so the campaign would be ready to respond to anything.

[SoFlaJet]

7. forget about McCain

the fucking idiot is campaigning for the same people who said all those horrible things about him and worst of all(and in my eyes-unforgivably)his WIFE.So don't give me the McCain crap anymore,he showed HIS true colors the other day introducing (add your own favorite Bush name here) at a fundraiser.

[pansypoo53219]

10. damn straight

campaigning for the chimp makes him just as much a whore as zell.

[SoFlaJet]

12. EXACTLY

fuck him.He has lost alot of my respect with where he stands in accordance to George w Bush

[Racenut20]

8. Great Job, Keep it up Mo Workers

Keep bringing Clark and Edwards there. You have a great candidate to beat Bond for Senator, and that can help the Kerry ticket.

It tempts me to move back for just until November. The Florida Senate race is turning to be a bummer. Bush's hand picked Cuban, and the WingNuts on the Republican ticket. And the 3 Democrats got more baggage than a 747 can carry in one load.

[pansypoo53219]

9. except that

georgie didn't win in 2000. he was installed by partisans.

[JI7]

11. true, but he did win missouri

[dolstein]

13. Add this to the list of "Nader spoiler" states

Let's see -- Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Florida, Missouri . . .