Poll: Bush would lose to Democrat; US wants Saddam out -- but wants UN involved

The million dollar question, of course, is what happens to the poll when there's an actual name attached to the Democrat?

 

Exactly; there is no Democratic candidate, right now, who wouldn't send those poll numbers spinning towards Bush...

 

SoFla...in local races, the Dem's number would always, always go up. Because at the level of even governor, or US Senator, the "name" that goes up there isn't well known beforehand. What will happen is that aLOT of the undecideds will be Dems who won't commit to an unknown, but will once there's a name out there.

I kind of expect that wouldn't work so well at the presidential level. But I don't really know.

 

I still think that unless a Dem candidate comes out real soon with some Byrd-like anti-war statements, the Donkey's are going to lose potential voters to the Grrrrrrreens again, which could cost them some states, and therefore, the WH.

And I am going to cackle like a heyena on nitrous...

 

Saturday Night Live had a game show where the winner got the Democratic nomination, and it showed all of the candidates trying to lose. Because they didn't want to get beat down Dukakis-style by George Herbert Walker Bush.

It's a lot funnier now than it was then.

They should really be polling the Supreme Court what their opinion of the election is, since they're the ones who get to decide.

 

This came up last week too. I will repeat what I said then.

Show us the polls 18 months from now because these polls change a lot over a period of time. All you need to do is look at Bush's poll numbers 18 months ago (circa Oct 2001), they were in the 90's.

 

Does that mean in 18 months he'll be in the teens?

 

Are we still beating that dead horse?

 

Heck, Republicans are still blaming Clinton for everything under the sun. We're entitled.

 

Touche' [walks off into the sunset searching for a way to divorce himself from the Limbaughs and Jesse Helm's of the world]

 

Join the Greens.

 

Dubya is the best thing that could've happened to Democrats. Hell, the best thing for the whole two-party system.

You think any Greens are ever going to actually vote Green again?

 

Florida.

 

I voted for Nader. I repent that vote for symbolic reasons only.

And I only slash tires of cars with Texas license plates.

EDIT - Greens are fond of pointing out that if Gore had also gotten every World Socialist Workers Party vote, he would have won the election.

And Gore got more votes in Florida than Dubya anyway, Greens, Commies or no. It was the Greens and Commies on the Supreme Court that cost Gore the election.

 

See you in court, buddy.

Sincerely,
Gray Davis...uh, maybe he's not the guy we want on point for this....

 

FWIW, I never said I was happy that 2000 dealt a crushing blow to the hopes of having more than 1.5 viable parties. In fact, I find it pretty depressing.

But you have to admit - if it's looking close, a lot of people who voted Green last time around are going to look at the possibility of voting a particular way to keep Dubya out. I didn't vote for Gore, but I sure as hell am casting my vote next time to keep Dubya from gaining a 2nd term. (NB: I didn't vote for Nader, either, tho I seriously considered it because I wanted Greens to get their 5%.)

 

Hey, when some of you guys come up for air from hyperventilating over Gore's loss in Florida because of Nader, it might be best pointed out that Algore lost his own home state. The people who knew him best rejected him.

 

I was almost getting nervous about this poll until I clicked on the link and found out that it's a Quinnipiac University poll, perhaps the most unreliable political polling operation in the country. When I used to work in the polling biz, Quinnipiac was widely recognized as a leftist hack outfit and reputable firms on both sides of the political aisle would have nothing to do with them or risk losing credibility themselves.

 

Not just fixed, but souped-up!