0
   

2004 Elections: Democratic Party Contenders

 
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 06:49 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
ican's quote, "I am actually suggesting that those currently disapproving of Bush include a large group of Republicans." I agree with you. The people taking the polls do not ask what party they belong to. Otherwise, the poll becomes worthless on the face of it. Q: Are you a republican? A: Yes. Do you approve of GWBush's performance?


I am neither a Republican or a Democrat.

I favor those who truly support the rule of law, and in particular support the Constitution as Amended and as interpreted by those, respectively, who adopted the Constitution and each of its amendments.

I do not approve of Bush's performance.

I may conclude by the November election that he is the least worst candidate. Then again I may not. In the event I cannot make up my mind which candidate is least worse, I'll probably vote for some approriate minor party candidate as my way of voting for NONE OF THE ABOVE.

I will vote!
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 06:56 pm
Quote:
Hint: the total electorate does not actually break up into equal parts of Dems, Reps and Independents.


Ahhh, but it does, Grasshopper. Observe:

http://www.pollingreport.com/images/partyID.GIF

Code:ABC News and ABC News/Washington Post Polls. Based on 332 surveys of 1,000 or more adults nationwide, conducted from 1981 through Oct. 2003.


"Generally speaking, do you usually think of yourself as a Democrat, a Republican, an independent, or what?" "Democrat" and "Republican" options rotated


___________Annual Averages___________

Democrat Republican Independent Other

Oct. '03: 31% 31% 31% 6%
2002 32 30 30 6
2001 33 30 29 7
2000 33 27 33 3
1999 34 26 33 5
1998 34 26 34 4
1997 35 26 34 5
1996 35 27 34 4
1995 32 28 36 3
1994 34 27 35 3
1993 35 26 35 2
1992 36 28 33 2
1991 33 30 33 2
1990 34 29 33 2
1989 37 29 31 2
1988 37 29 31 2
1987 36 26 35 2
1986 34 29 33 3
1985 35 28 32 3
1984 37 24 35 3
1983 39 23 34 2
1982 38 23 35 3


Pretty much seems the divisions are damned near equal at present. Democratic affilliation has been declining for nearly two decades, while Republican affilliation has increased dramatically since about '99, and Independents dropped sharply following 2000, and have just begun to show a moderate increase. 31% / 31% / 31% is close enough to even for Government Work, wouldn't you say? Additionally, if extrapolation from the demonstrated trending is pursued, the conclusion is not favorable to The Democrats as comapared to either of the other two groups.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 07:09 pm
Fox has just announced an Entrance Poll (Probably meaningless, as it is pre-discussion and decision, and a small sample)
Kerry: 29%
Edwards: 23%
Dean: 21%
Gephardt: 16%

A startling number is that 46% were first-time attendees. If the trending holds, Gephardt should probably start looking for a ghost writer and begin his memoirs. Still, its way too early, its one entry poll, and who knows ... there is certainly more to come, no doubt including surprises, shifts, and reversals.
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 07:16 pm
Thanks, timber...keep those updates coming. Obviously a lot will change in the next few hours.
-rjb-
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 07:21 pm
Turnout is being reported as heavy, with some locations finding they haven't enough materials or seating. An Iowa TV station is talking about Edward's "Amazing strength". The way caucii work, all in all, it looks very good for Kerry and Edwards, particularly given the extraordinary number of first-timers reportedly participating. Dean must be squirming. I'd really like to see him interviewed. Still, as is often said in military circles, "First reports are always wrong".
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 07:30 pm
The Des Moines Register has just begun posting precinct results. With 118 of 1993 precints reporting;

Dean: 16%
Edwards: 34%
Gephardt: 12%
Kerry: 35%
Kucinich, Lieberman, Sharpton and Clark: 0%

These are official results, not entry or exit polls.
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 07:33 pm
C-Span, at this moment, is televising LIVE an actual caucus.

Switch over and watch democracy in action.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 07:45 pm
Meanwhile, in Women's Basketball, Iowa drubs Wisconsin, 66-46 Final.

http://desmoinesregister.com/sports/photos/23293358_t.jpg
DOUG WELLS/The Register
Up and over: Iowa's Jennie Lillis shoots
over Wisconsin's Lello Gebisa en route
to scoring 21 points in the Hawkeyes'
66-46 victory. "We tried to speedup their
game more than they wanted," Lillis said.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 07:48 pm
Thanks, PDiddie. Both C-Spans are showing live caucii. Interesting.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 07:59 pm
Latest from The Des Moines Register[/i]: 645 precincts reporting;
Clark 0.10%
Dean 17.70
Edwards: 33.10
Gephardt: 10.80
Kerry: 37.10
Kucinich: 00.80

Lieberman and Sharpton: 00.00%
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 08:21 pm
With over half reporting, 1226 out of 1993, Clark holds at 0.10%, Dean has moved up to 17.90%, Edwards has dropped to 32.6%, Gephardt falls to 10.5%, Kerry has moved up to 37.70%, and Kucinich has surged to within a whisker of 0.9%. Actually, with as little change as has occurred over the past half hour, one might assume the final results will hold fairly close to the most recently reported figures, though looking at the results county-by-county, the rural precincts are reporting more slowly. That may have an influence which will show up later, but I doubt it.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 08:45 pm
http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20040119/i/r2735269787.jpg

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20040119/i/r520718853.jpg

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20040118/i/r3353936172.jpg

Gephardt has just announced his withdrawal from the Presidential Race.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 08:48 pm
And Kerry is the one that said he really doesn't need to be president. Wink
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 09:01 pm
With over 1680 precincts out of 1993 reporting, it is as good as official:

Kerry: 38%
Edwards: 33%
Dean: 18%
Gephardt: 11%
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 09:09 pm
I thought Gephardt would do much better, and didn't think Edwards would do that well. Maybe the other states will come out with different results.
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 09:13 pm
And so Kerry, Edwards and a wounded Dean will head to NH to join Clark. Gepheart is out.
(Edwards may take a pass on NH, preferring to go for the SC primary, letting Kerry, Clark, Lieberman and Dean to duke it out there).
Organized labor certainly took a hit it in Iowa. Despite a big effort on behalf of Dean and Gepheart, they couldn't seem to turn out the players. -rjb-
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 09:13 pm
Quote:
http://msnbc.msn.com/images/msnbc/msnbclogo.gif

NBC News: Kerry wins Iowa caucuses

Edwards strong second; Dean trails; Gephardt may be out MSNBC

MSNBC
Updated: 9:49 p.m. ET Jan. 19, 2004


Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts won the Iowa Democratic presidential caucuses Monday night, NBC News projected based on more then three-quarters of the precincts reporting. Kerry and Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina appeared to break away from the rest of the candidates Monday, running far ahead of Howard Dean and Dick Gephardt, who will drop out of the race Tuesday, aides told MSNBC-TV.

Kerry was drawing support by 38 percent of caucus-goers with 80 percent of the state's 1,993 precincts reporting. Edwards, a senator from North Carolina who gained rapidly in tracking surveys after he forswore the sharp attacks that characterized his rivals' campaigns, was running a strong second at 32 percent.

Dean, the former governor of Vermont, who had been considered the front-runner for the presidential nomination in recent weeks, was well behind at 18 percent, and he acknowledged that Kerry was the likely winner.

"I think Senator Kerry and Senator Edwards did a great job," Dean said in an interview on MSNBC's "Hardball." "We came in third. I would have liked to have come in first, but we didn't. ... I'm very hopeful I'll be back for the general election."

"We're going to New Hampshire, and we're going to win," he said, looking ahead to the first primary in eight days.

Gephardt, the U.S. representative from Missouri who won this contest in 1988, trailed badly with only 11 percent in the partial returns, below the 15 percent threshold required to claim delegates to the state's convention in the summer.

Gephardt, who had said a bad loss here might well end his campaign, had been scheduled to fly to New Hampshire, but he scheduled a news conference for Tuesday in St. Louis, instead. Campaign aides told MSNBC-TV that he would withdraw.

Edwards' campaign manager, Nick Baldick, told MSNBC-TV from New Hampshire: "Now we have the wind at our backs, we have New Hampshire, and we'll meet you in Columbia [S.C.] on February 3rd."


You heard it here first, folks ... hehehehehehe Mr. Green
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 09:35 pm
I wouldn't count Dean out by any means. He has tremendous fundraising potential, and even with Edward's surprising performance, it could come down to a Dean-Kerry slugfest. I imagine Dean's campaign style will change a bit. This could play to Dean's advantage, in a way; it makes him once again the insurgent and relieves him of the burden of being front-runner. Clark is sure to come in for attack ...The road to N.H. could be very nasty. The real question now, IMO, however, is just how much money can Edwards raise, and will it be enough, constrained as it will be by Federal Campaign Financing requirements, to counter the combined money machines of Dean and Kerry? Edwards has a helluva hill to climb yet.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 09:41 pm
From the MSNBC post, "Edwards, a senator from North Carolina who gained rapidly in tracking surveys after he forswore the sharp attacks that characterized his rivals' campaigns, was running a strong second at 32 percent." He's the "new" guy on the block, and the only sensible approach to his campaign. People never seem to learn that negative campaigns are not vote getting strategy. When will they ever learn?
0 Replies
 
Mapleleaf
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2004 10:21 pm
Sooooooooooooooooooo....why did Kerry rise to the top? The TV folks suggested the people wanted someone who was electable...could beat Bush.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.13 seconds on 07/13/2025 at 11:51:03