2004 Elections: Democratic Party Contenders

Timber...Cool. I actually thought about making mention of that image of Dukakis pretending to be a soldier. But I didn't think anyone would recall that.
And then I thought about Mr Bush landing on the aircraft carrier declaring "Mission accomplished."
I had to lie down for awhile.

0 Replies

Quote:

ELECTION 2004 NEWS COVERAGE

Kerry riding high, Edwards on the move, Boston Sunday Herald poll shows
By David R. Guarino/BREAKING NEWS
Saturday, January 24, 2004

Sen. John F. Kerry is sprinting into the New Hampshire primary with a comfortable 12-point lead, as Howard Dean is threatened by hard-charging Sen. John Edwards in the race for second place, a new Boston Sunday Herald poll shows.

The latest poll shows Kerry riding high with 35 percent of the vote, followed by Dean with 23 percent, Edwards with 14 percent and Wesley K. Clark with 12 percent.

``The numbers right now do not suggest that any of the other candidates would be able to surpass Kerry in the race,'' said Herald pollster R. Kelly Myers.

Dean has stopped his campaign freefall but is now at risk of being caught by Edwards, who has doubled his New Hampshire support from his 7 percent pre-Iowa standing.

The North Carolina senator, hoping for a strong showing to push him onto his neighborhood turf with the South Carolina primary on Feb. 3, remains among the most popular candidate in the field and scored best among voters who saw the race's final debate Thursday night.

``The only candidate to get a bounce out of the recent debate is Edwards, he's clearly on the move in the right direction,'' Myers said.

The Herald poll of 524 likely Democratic primary voters, taken from Thursday to today by RKM Research and Communications, has a 4.3 percent margin of error.

The poll is the first full three-day polling sample taken after the Thursday debate.

The survey held perhaps the worst news for retired Gen. Clark, who has dropped from 20 percent in New Hampsire before the Iowa caucuses.

The poll showed little movement among the bottom-runners, with U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut still at 5 percent, U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) at 3 percent and the Rev. Al Sharpton, who has not actively campaigned in New Hampshire, with no measurable support.

Eight percent of voters remain undecided but, without some race shake-up, will likely split in similar percentages to other voters, Myers said.

Among the poll's other key findings:

A high turnout of independent voters would help Edwards and Clark - who close ranks with Dean and Kerry among unenrolled voters but lose by wider margins among registered Democrats.

Thirty-eight percent of voters believe Dean, the former Vermont governor criticized for his post-caucus speech in Iowa, does not have the temperment to be president - 49 percent say he does.

As for images damaging a candidate, I really see no negatives attached to Bush the Younger's USS Lincoln episode. The Opposition would like to play it as a negative, yes, but The Folks In General don't seem to see it that way. Hammering it likely would serve only to alienate the very folks The Democrats hope to sway; the majority of the populace which supports The War Effort.

0 Replies

timberlandko wrote:

I really see no negatives attached to Bush the Younger's USS Lincoln episode. The Opposition would like to play it as a negative, yes, but The Folks In General don't seem to see it that way. Hammering it likely would serve only to alienate the very folks The Democrats hope to sway; the majority of the populace which supports The War Effort.

That they support the war effort in general doesn't necessarily mean they like that Bush image in particular, Timber ... or, to be more exact:

Polls do show ample enough majorities believing that the US did the right thing to go into war, in the first place. But questions that focus more specifically on whether Bush has handled the post-war situation well, or whether his administration has a good plan for post-war efforts, have shown either very narrow majorities, or outright minorities approving of Bush.

Barring the brief post-Saddam-capture high, the ABC/WaPo poll has shown 55% or less approve of how Bush is handling Iraq ever since August. And the Newsweek poll has shown less than 50% approving of how Bush is doing in Iraq ever since September, again excepted only by the one post-capture poll.

Basically, about half of the population doesnt look too favourably on how Bush has handled stuff ever since he boasted, "Mission Accomplished". So the whole imagery around that is probably not all too popular, at all.

Oh, rbj, thanks for the correction on the use of "rebel yell", by the way. Better change that to "rebel yelp", then ;-)

0 Replies

People, we have a first, I think.

We've had polls before where the "generic", anonymous Democrat had a lead on Bush. But as far as I can remember, any Democrat specified by name always was behind at least a few percentage points. Clark once came within 2% or something, I think thats been the best.

But here's the new Newsweek poll, from 22-23 January, as compared to the 8-9 January data.

Quote:

Newsweek Poll conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates. Jan. 22-23, 2004. N=1,006 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 3.

Bush 46% (-6)
Kerry 49% (+8)

Bush 48% (-2)
Clark 47% (+6)

Bush 49% (-5)
Edwards 46% (+8)

Bush 49% (-3)
Lieberman 45% (+4)

Bush 50% (-1)
Dean 45% (+2)

Note that even Howard Dean has caught up some with Bush, in spite of the most disastrous two weeks of his campaign yet.

I guess the State of the Union speech didnt impress ...

More:

Quote:

"In general, would you like to see George W. Bush reelected to another term as president, or not?"

Yes 44% (-4)
No 52% (+6)
Don't Know 4% (-2)

The same poll has Bush's job rating down 4% in the last two weeks, to 50% exactly.

That's the lowest it's been since May 2001.

The disapproval rate is at 44%. Still a +6% balance for Bush thus. But, still - that 44% is the highest it's ever been.

Forsure, the Newsweek polls are usually among the more unfavourable for Bush. The CNN/Time poll usually has about the same numbers, but the ABC/WaPo poll has always been "behind" a month or so when signalling GWB's falling numbers, while the Fox polls acknowledge new lows for Bush even later.

0 Replies

That Newsweek poll is ammunition for The Opposition, and likely will get more play on The Left than will either of the similar, essentially contemporaneous Fox and Gallup polls, which offer rather different results. The Newsweek poll's divergence from the indications of a larger body of polls, including Pew Research, Zogby, ARG, and others besides the afore mentioned Fox and Gallup surveys merits attention, for sure. I would be unsurprised, really, if there developed a convergence of downturns for Bush the Younger over the next few weeks, as The Democrats, by virtue of the primaries, get more and more press. Bear in mind that as the would-be candidates battle among themselves, they as a body campaign against The Current Administration, which has yet to begin to offer substantive rebuttal. In the meanwhile, should the economy continue to strengthen, should North Korea and Iran continue to trend toward concilliation, should Iraq continue to stabilize and move toward democratic autonomy, should progress continue in the Global War on Terrorism, with more siezures, arrests, and foiled plots, should relations with the UN, and with some of its individual members which have been at the forefront of opposition to The US continue to improve, and should Bush the Younger avoid becoming embroiled in a personal scandal, all of which are quite likely, The Current Administration is likely to have more than enough ammunition to devastate whatever opposition as may be presented. The Opposition ain't seen nothin' yet. I sure as hell wouldn't want to be in the target area when those first broadsides are fired. Think about it.

0 Replies

Another quick thought here, more pertinent to the race for the nomination; the fascination with NH, and the conjecture swirling about the upcoming Southern contests, rather blur focus on what I think may be a far more important contest on Feb 3rd; Missouri. With Gephardt's withdrawal, Missouri well could be the real proving ground. Will Gephardt offer an endorsement? If so, on whom will he bestow his blessing? This seems to me possibly Gephardt's last, best chance to participate in history, and I imagine he's weighing the potentialities throughout every waking moment.

0 Replies

timberlandko wrote:

That Newsweek poll is ammunition for The Opposition, and likely will get more play on The Left than will either of the similar, essentially contemporaneous Fox and Gallup polls, which offer rather different results. The Newsweek poll's divergence from the indications of a larger body of polls, including Pew Research, Zogby, ARG, and others besides the afore mentioned Fox and Gallup surveys merits attention, for sure.

Its true, the Newsweek poll, like the Pew Research one, tends to show less support for Bush, just like the CBS and Fox polls pretty consistently show more support for Bush than the other polls - throughout the past two years, really. The others are in the middle or vary.

Thing is, thus far, the Newsweek polls have always had an almost predictory value - or the CBS, ABC and Fox polls have simply been lagging. So that should give pause for thought for those who want to reject these here latest results as unrepresentative.

I checked the pattern by going through Bush's job ratings.

During the steady fall in Bush's ratings after 9/11, the poll that had him first fall below 70% was a NBC/WSJ one on 10/6/02, with Newsweek following on 11/7/02, Pew Research on 16/7/02, CBS/NYT and CNN/Gallup both on 22/7, Fox on 23/7/02, ABC/WaPo on 24/7/02 and CNN/Time on 28/08/02.

Bush then first fell below 60% in the Pew Research poll of 27/10/02, with CNN/Time following on 18/12/02, Gallup/CNN on 12/1/03, Newsweek on 17/1/03, ABC/WaPo on 20/1/03, NBC/WSJ on 21/1/03 and CBS/NYT on 22/1/03, while Fox acknowledged the trend last on 30/1/03.

After the boost in the polls the Iraq war gave him, Bush first fell below 60% in the polls again in the Pew Research poll of 8/7/03. ABC/WaPo followed on 10/7/03, Newsweek on 11/7/03, Fox on 16/7/03, CNN/Time on 17/7/03, CNN/Gallup on 20/7/03, NBC/WSJ on 28/7/03 and CBS/NYT on 12/8/03.

The latest Newsweek poll shows Bush down to 50-44%, or +6 - as said, his worst score yet. But thats no anomaly. Last week's CBS/NYT poll had him down to 50% (or +5), too - also his worst balance yet. And the last CNN/Gallup poll had him at 53%, or +9 - different from Newsweek only within the margin of error. And Zogby has him at 49% Excellent/Good vs 50% Fair/Poor - not an all-time low, but close. So you might as well call the latest CNN/Time (+13), Fox (+14) and ABC/WaPo (+18) polls the ones who are out of sync.

My bet is that the other polls will once again follow Newsweek's lead over time, if no drastic new developments take place. Not necessarily about Kerry's lead over Bush, mind you - he's just enjoying a temporary little boost. But about the main Dem candidates closing in on Bush and Bush's ratings dropping to 50% or, who knows, below.

I mean - <lets go of number-fetishist-scrutiny for a moment> - the man just made his State of the Union speech - just when Dean flared, flamed and collapsed - and STILL even Dean closed in on Bush. That must say something.

(Sometimes I truly think the man's chances can only be saved by war or terrorist attacks. But then I remember his campaign war chest and the risk of Kerry being nominated, for example, and I realise that could still do it, too. But one thing is sure - a particularly popular President, Bush is not. Every time war subsides, Bush falls - to ratings below the ones Carter, Reagan or Clinton enjoyed at this point in time (see graph a few pages up). An event like 9/11 should have brought the nation together - but instead, you have one of the most weakly popular and controversial presidents of recent time. And he doesn't even have a proper opponent yet!)

0 Replies

nimh wrote

Quote:

And he doesn't even have a proper opponent yet!

That sounds somehow dammned familiar to my Gerd's situation :wink:

(Well, we did neither have a war nor 9/11 - thus he's lower in the figures Laughing

)

0 Replies

timber has continue to post polls that show Bush ahead of everybody else. I'm gonna wait and see if he continues his unbridled polls posting as the others go ahead of Bush. Yes, timber, this is only one poll, but trends "do matter."

0 Replies

Absolutely, c.i. , trends do matter. That's the point of looking at a variety of polls over time. I don't make 'em up, I just report 'em. And just whuttinhell is an "unbridled poll"? I will point out that, since his inauguration, Bush the Younger's Favorabilty Rating across a broad spectrum of polls has averaged a positive spread of over 10 points (currently, it is about 12.6%), something only JFK managed to rack up. That itself has some meaning. Note too that it has dipped negative only a very few times, and only in isolated polls with no broad consensus. That too is unprecented. Yet another thing to note is that every major dip has been followed by a strong recovery into positive territory. That too is part of the overall trend. I'm not anticipating any significant change in the well established, hundreds-of-samples-over-three-plus-year trend. Could happen, of course, all things are possible. On the other hand, some things are more probable than are other things. I've found it profitable to go with the probabilities, as evidenced by trendings of multiple indicators, whether looking at stock market performance or political performance.

0 Replies

Timber and I already had a little exchange on Bush's approval rating, the other day, too. Peter Beinart (TNR) echoes the obvious point that came up (emphasis mine):

Quote:

Since he took office, President Bush's popularity has swung largely along a single axis: When national security predominates, it goes up; when domestic policy predominates, it goes down. On September 9, 2001, Bush's approval rating, according to an ABC News/Washington Post poll, was 55 percent. Two days after the September 11 attacks, it had spiked to 86 percent. Throughout 2002, as the war on terrorism gradually receded as an issue, Bush's approval rating steadily dropped. By January 20, 2003, it was back down to 59 percent.

It shot back up during the Iraq war, peaking at 77 percent on April 9, 2003, the day Baghdad fell. And, since then, with Iraq no longer dominating the headlines, it has dropped again. Since last fall, Bush's approval rating has hovered between 53 and 59 percent.

He also predicts the trouble this might cause Bush, citing some bafflingly intriguing poll numbers. On education, prescription drugs, even taxes and the economy, overall, the polled voters trust the Democrats more.

"In fact, respondents preferred the Democrats on every domestic issue discussed in the latest ABC/Washington Post poll", the quote below concludes. (And as shown above, the ABC poll isn't necessarily the most Dem-friendly one).

Quote:

n the ten months until Election Day, national security could recede even further. [Today,] the White House is busy getting Iraq off the front page. It is willing to compromise on almost any aspect of the occupation, it seems, except its June 30 deadline to hand over sovereignty to an Iraqi government [..]

This public shift toward domestic policy could cause President Bush some of the same headaches it is causing Dean. Ever since taking office, the Bush administration has labored to blunt the Democrats' traditional advantage on domestic issues. But this week's ABC News/ Washington Post poll suggests those efforts have largely failed.

The No Child Left Behind Act was supposed to give the GOP an edge on education. But, if anything, it has done the opposite. According to ABC and the Post, the 19-point advantage on the issue that Bush enjoyed on September 9, 2001, four months before the law was signed, has now turned into a one-point Democratic advantage. The prescription-drug benefit Bush signed last December was supposed to eliminate this key Democratic talking point. But the Democrats today enjoy a 16-point lead on prescription drugs, larger than in April 2003, before the bill was passed. In June 2001, respondents were seven points more likely to trust Bush on taxes than the Democrats. Today, that has turned into a three-point Democratic lead. Even the improving economy hasn't given Bush a partisan boost. The president led by ten points on the issue in April 2003 but now trails by seven points. In fact, respondents preferred the Democrats on every domestic issue discussed in the latest ABC/Washington Post poll.

He spells out how the State of the Union speech only illustrated Bush's problems in this regard:

Quote:

All of which brings us back to the State of the Union, which [..] was supposed to highlight the president's domestic policy vision. It didn't. Bush began by calling the United States "a nation called to great responsibilities." And, on foreign policy, the themes were indeed large [..]. But, when the president turned to the home front, the responsibilities didn't seem very great at all. Hemmed in by a conservative base suspicious of government activism and a budget deficit that leaves little room for new spending initiatives, Bush laid out proposals so trivial they made Bill Clinton's famed micro-initiatives seem bold by comparison. There was a call for associated health plans, which would allow small businesses to band together to buy health care. Bush said the country could improve medical treatment by "computerizing health records." He called for a "grassroots campaign to help inform families" about the danger of sexually transmitted diseases among teens. He offered a whopping $300 million over four years for job training among ex-prisoners. And, with Tom Brady in the audience, he denounced the use of steroids in professional sports.

The speech didn't even end with domestic policy, as advertised. [..] Summing up the reaction of a Toledo, Ohio, focus group immediately following the speech, CNN reporter Jeff Flock said, "The sense is they heard too much foreign policy stuff, too much war, too much terrorism. They want to hear about the issues that impact them."

0 Replies

Hey NIMH did you hear about this one? tell me, are you locked in the terror line?
Hey George are you goofing on elvis, hey baby, are we losing touch?
If you believed they put a man on the moon, we'll put a man on mars.
If you believe there's nothing up my sleeve, then nothing is cool.
Its a state of the union and the people are saying "D'oh, am I the fool?"

0 Replies

A recent article from CBS offers a few thoughts to ponder:

Quote:

... Republicans overwhelmingly approve of the President's job performance, while most Democrats disapprove. Independents are now slightly negative, with 45% approving and 50% disapproving.

In fact, most of the decline in Bush's approval ratings in the past month comes from Independents. With the exception of terrorism, Bush suffers significant double-digit declines in all approval ratings from this group.

This president's job approval rating surpasses his father's at the same point in that administration, and ties Bill Clinton's. In January 1996, as Bill Clinton was preparing his ultimately successful re-election campaign, only about half of Americans approved of the job he was doing. George H. W. Bush was in worse shape at the same point in his presidency, with a 43% approval rating and 47% disapproving.

PRESIDENTIAL JOB APPROVAL
George W. Bush, Now
Approve
50%
Disapprove
45%

Bill Clinton, 1/96
Approve
49%
Disapprove
40%

George H.W. Bush. 1/92
Approve
43%
Disapprove
47%

There's lots to come yet. We shall see. At this point, my take is that while The Opposition has hopes and dreams, The Current Administration has realistic expectations and confidence bolstered by track record.

For those who care, here's an interesting Article examing the many advantages currently enjoyed by Bush the Younger, not least of which is incumbency.

And, of course, we must consider that the interest in and awareness of politics among the members of this particular discussion group is quite abberational as compared to The Public At Large. The State of The Union Address is a more-or-less roundly ignored media event, as far as Middle America goes. The TV ratings placed it behind several sitcoms and movies running at the same time. What we think is significant largely hasn't even really registered on The National Political Consciousness Radar yet.

0 Replies

dys' quote, "Its a state of the union and the people are saying "D'oh, am I the fool?"" The only question most of us have is "what percentage of the American "people"?" At fifty percent support for Bush, it means only fifty perecent is seeing the "light" of being taken the fool.

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

Hey NIMH did you hear about this one? tell me, are you locked in the terror line?
Hey George are you goofing on elvis, hey baby, are we losing touch?
If you believed they put a man on the moon, we'll put a man on mars.
If you believe there's nothing up my sleeve, then nothing is cool.
Its a state of the union and the people are saying "D'oh, am I the fool?"

0 Replies

I've expounded in dramatic fashion previously, so I don't feel the need to go long in this post:

Kerry, Dean, Clark, Edwards, in that order.

Lieberman will be the next to drop out.

0 Replies

Good evening. I've read through all of the postings and, as near as I can tell, here are the predictions from those folks willing to do more than quote polls:
PDiddie: Kerry, Dean, Clark, Edwards
RJB: Kerry, Dean, Edwards, Clark
Timber: Kerry, Edwards, Dean, Clark

Anyone else want to play the Pick the NH Winner game? Deadline is, I guess, 6 am Tuesday morning.

0 Replies

Nah, I'll pass on that rjb, thanks. I'll leave it at this: I think Edwards and Dean will do better than expected, and Kerry will do worse than expected.

Then again, that could be wishful thinking ;-)

0 Replies

Yes, you guessed it - I gave myself the day off, and I'm feeling geeky.

We've been citing this poll, that poll, and whenever one poll was cited, another poster would cite another one, contending the representativeness of the first. Hell, we even had someone here who discounted Zogby because of his ethnic background!

So, les' look at them altogether, and see those long-term trends across the polls. Forget pollingreport - this graph is all my own making! Well - all the data are from Polling Report, it's true, I admit it ;-). I've simplified them into max. two results per month - if there were more, I took the average of the data from resp. before and after the 15/16th (except for 9/01).

Coupla things strike me, in all of this:

- The obvious, the point we've been debating: Bush has had two major (and one minor) boosts: the 9/11 aftermath and the Iraq war (and Saddam's capture). These created respective new (but ever lower) heights, from which he would then steadily drop.

- Bush is essentially somewhere between 50-55%, much like he was just before 9/11 happened. The difference is that back then, his negatives were between 30-40%, and they are now up to 40-45%.

- The polls are actually a lot more in agreement with each other than one might have suspected. Neither Newsweek nor ABC polls are particularly prone to diverge much from the rest, they all show pretty much the same, striking pattern. If there is any exception, it's the Fox polls showing visibly lower negatives for Bush than any other polls.

Here's a zoom-in on the last year or so:

0 Replies

Holy moly!!

You made that thing?

Wow.

Perusing...

0 Replies

2004 Elections: Democratic Party Contenders

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know