2
   

If you were a bookie... Polls and bets on the 2004 elections

 
 
Sofia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 06:36 pm
There is ALWAYS a bounce to get.
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 06:42 pm
nimh wrote:
Brand X wrote:
Gee, the Dems said there just wasn't a bounce to get.

So did you.

Brand X wrote:
I don't think there will be any more bounce from the RNC convention than Kerry got really.


They're the professionals, not me.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 06:45 pm
Still seems strange to be gloating and smirking about gee, how dumb they are, they got it all wrong - if you were saying the exact same thing.

Well, perhaps "strange" isnt quite the word I'd like to use here, but let's leave it at that for the moment.
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 06:56 pm
nimh wrote:
Still seems strange to be gloating and smirking about gee, how dumb they are, they got it all wrong - if you were saying the exact same thing.

Well, perhaps "strange" isnt quite the word I'd like to use here, but let's leave it at that for the moment.


I'm not saying they are dumb, I'm saying I'm smarter.
0 Replies
 
Sofia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 07:00 pm
If he's this snarky at a bounce, imagine what it will be like around here when Bush wins...
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 07:08 pm
Sofia wrote:
If he's this snarky at a bounce, imagine what it will be like around here when Bush wins...


It's not the bounce, it's me.
0 Replies
 
Sofia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 07:10 pm
I refuse to believe it.
You're too mild and pleasant.

Smile Smile
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 07:15 pm
Those anticipating a close election likely will be confounded. Those advocating a Kerry victory likely will be disappointed. If proven incorrect in my assumptions, I''ll be chagrinned, if borne out, I'll be gratified. And just a reminder, there's nothing new at all in my saying any of that.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 07:18 pm
Quote:
I'm not saying they are dumb, I'm saying I'm smarter.

You're smarter cause you were saying, well, the same as them?

"Heh heh. Yeah. Heh heh."

Leaving puerile silliness aside, this is interesting detail from that Newsweek poll with the huge Bush lead:

Quote:
[..] voters who see terrorism as the top priority overwhelmingly prefer Bush (87 percent of those who see it as the top issue with vote for the president)

[..] Kerry is still favored by those who rank the economy (61 percent), health care (58 percent) and even, by a small margin, Iraq (51 percent) as their top issue.

That clarifies a lot, I think (even if it's just the obvious).

The next bit increases the puzzle again, tho. The Convention obviously changed a lot of minds - even tho fewer people than ever watched it:

Quote:
[..] a record low number of registered voters report having watched the proceedings at home. Only about four in 10 (40 percent) voters claim to have watched at least some of the convention coverage on TV this week, less than the 48 percent who said they watched at least some of the Democratic convention in July.

[..] Bush's speech received similar marks to that of his challenger a month prior. Both speeches were well received, with 30 percent of voters saying Bush's speech made them more likely to vote GOP, while 10 percent say it made less likely. (At the DNC, Kerry had scored 32 percent and 8 percent respectively.) Less than half (45 percent) of all voters said they watched all or part of Bush's 62 minute speech Thursday night, a slightly smaller percentage than voters who saw Kerry's acceptance speech (51 percent).


Finally, one last interesting bit:

Quote:
When asked which other individual speakers made them more likely to vote Republican, voters gave Rudy Giuliani and First Lady Laura Bush somewhat better ratings than Sen. John McCain and even California's movie star governor. Of the first lady's speech, 25 percent said they were as a result more likely to vote for the Republican ticket (versus 7 percent who said they were less likely); of the former New York mayor's, 24 percent were more likely (versus 8 percent less). Twenty percent were more likely to vote Republican because of McCain and 22 percent thanks to Arnold Schwarzenegger. Cheney's score (19 percent more likely versus 15 less) was far below [even] Democratic Sen. Zell Miller's controversial keynote speech [..] (21 percent said he made them more likely to vote Republican) [..]


link
0 Replies
 
Sofia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 07:18 pm
Did that sound like James Earl Jones to anybody else?

Smile
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 07:22 pm
Oy, Sofia you're really confronting me with my ignorance. First I had to look up "snarky", now I find I dont have a clue who James Earl Jones is. (Sounds like an R 'n' B singer from the fifties.)

Not to mention, of course, probably miserably failing at my foreign attempt to do a Beavis/Butthead imitation.
0 Replies
 
Sofia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 07:27 pm
Glad to speak to you, nimh.

James Earl Jones is the voice of Darth Vader--but the one I imagined when I read Timber's post was the booming, authoritative voice of James Earl Jones, knowingly intoning, "This.....is CNN."

He's like....an Oracle.....<and he's right> Smile
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 07:42 pm
OK!

See - learn something new every day ;-)
0 Replies
 
Sofia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 08:37 pm
Laura Bush? I mean I like her a lot, but she tied Guiliani in vote getting?

(I missed her speech. I'll make sure to catch it on CSPAN, now.)

I thought Guiliani would be a big draw--and I thought Arnold would--but Laura?

Interesting contrast to Heinz.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 08:40 pm
nimh wrote:
The next bit increases the puzzle again, tho. The Convention obviously changed a lot of minds - even tho fewer people than ever watched it ...


Perhaps the "puzzle" is in the mind of the author of the MSNBC article to which you refer, nimh.

Quote:
GOP tops Democrats in convention viewers

Peter Hartlaub, Chronicle Pop Culture Critic


If ratings were votes, George W. Bush would be sitting pretty today, because the Republican National Convention finished with a larger television audience this week than its Democratic counterpart did in July. In addition, President Bush's acceptance of the nomination drew more viewers than challenger John Kerry's speech.

On ABC, CBS and NBC, plus three cable news channels, Nielsen Media Research figures estimate that the Republican convention averaged a 15.3 rating, while Bush's Thursday night speech during the 7 o'clock hour peaked with an 18.2 rating. The Democrats averaged a 14.3 rating over three nights, and Kerry's speech drew a 16.9 rating ...


Folks watched. Folks made up their mind. More folks watched the Republican dog-and-pony show than tuned in for the Democrats' version. The folks whose minds were changed tended not to favory Kerry.


Folks are listenin'. They're just not all that interested in hearin' what the Democrats have to say.
0 Replies
 
Craven de Kere
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 08:43 pm
kickycan wrote:
And I'm betting it won't even be that close.


I think you are right. IMO, it will be a solid Bush win (unfortunately).
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 08:54 pm
From back in December, Just for convenient reference
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 08:55 pm
timberlandko wrote:
Quote:
The next bit increases the puzzle again, tho. The Convention obviously changed a lot of minds - even tho fewer people than ever watched it ...


Perhaps the "puzzle" is in the mind of the author of the MSNBC article to which you refer, nimh.

Well to be fair he wasnt exactly making it up - the article was on the results of the Newsweek poll. Newsweek poll apparently said "a record low number of registered voters report having watched the proceedings" at the Rep Convention.

But of course, you just posted the ratings, so it looks like the poll was wrong on that one.

Now le's just hope it was wrong on the rest as well ;-)
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 09:02 pm
Hope may be comforting, but it ain't much of an action plan on which to base realistic expectations :wink:
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 09:06 pm
I think I already did the realistic expectations thing in a post above.

But now I wanna go to bed ... so to get some good night's rest, I was in the process of filing 'em away for the moment ;-)
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Oz fest 2004 - Question by Love2is0evol
Human Events Names Man of the Year, 2004 - Discussion by gungasnake
Your 2004 mix tape - Discussion by boomerang
BUSH WON FAIR AND SQUARE... - Discussion by Frank Apisa
Weeping and gnashing of teeth - Discussion by FreeDuck
WOW! Why Andrew Sullivan is supporting John Kerry - Discussion by BumbleBeeBoogie
Margarate Hassan - hostage in Iraq - Discussion by msolga
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 09/21/2024 at 05:49:08