Hey Admin

[rsquirell]

We have 2 weeks to go before the election...and Ormonde and I were wondering if we could restart our political thread. People could show off their video prowess by submitting original political ads, short documentaries and farces poking fun at the other side. Rules are...you have to make em yourself...not just pull them off the internet. Whadayasay?

[ormonde]

rsquirell

Getting a little nervous - thinking Bush might loose?

[rsquirell]

lol....dream on

[ormonde]

"dream on"

A guy can be allowed to "Dream" can't he? - Regardless, it's going to be another close one...

[rsquirell]

Its gonna be a blowout...i didn't realize kerry's military background was soooo shakey....what if he got a less than honorable discharge for collaborating with the enemy in Paris while still an officer? Look at Daschel 4 pts behind thune...the RNC is gonna pick up 10 senate seats in the landslide. The American people are going to come out strong against the traitors.

[ormonde]

"Its gonna be a blowout"

I don't know where you are getting that from - even though I don't put 100% of credence in poll results. See the following anyway:

http://www.business-journal.com/ZogbyPollFindsPresidentialRace.asp

[rsquirell]

Zogby nailed the 96 Dole/Clinton...but he really missed it in '02....and his poles have been more democrat leaning lately than even the CNN poles. You don't think that might be because he's a muslim?

[ormonde]

"You don't think that might be because he's a muslim?"

No I don't...

[rsquirell]

I heard someplace that ralph nader is a muslim too... from lebanon. Doing some research on carroll quigley (clinton's mentor at george towne) i'm finding out all kinds of things about the New World Order, CFR, Illuminatti, bildebergers, and trilateral commission...i thought they were just fantasies of conspiracy theoroists...but, apparently, they're for real...with wall street and international banking heavies financing international communism and getting hold of both political parties...whoa...that's getting too deep and scary. Anyway, you know as well as i that polling questions can be slanted, and results can be skewed by areas called, time of day or week they're called...and the fact that many republicans hang up on pollsters because the more affluent areas are targets for telemarketers...and you never know if the poller is for real, or someone mining data to target a marketing campaign at you. Tom Delay said republicans fare about 15% better at the voting booth than in the polls...and since the latest CNN poll has bush up by 8....i'd say it's going to be a blowout. Bush keeps the red states...and the battleground states are shifting. Kerry's given up on Missouri...and bush is in New Jersey today. He may be in New York next week...and soon the "battleground states" will be Massachussetts and California. Especially with more and more revelations about Kerry's military service and NVA collaboration in 1971. The difference with him and Benedict Arnold is Arnold was a true war hero who attempted to collaborate...and Kerry was a phony war hero who actually did collaborate with the enemy ( according to his own testimony before the senate in 1971.)

[ormonde]

" Especially with more and more revelations about Kerry's military service and NVA collaboration in 1971."

Be that as it may - and I'm certainly not disputing it, I think that the upcoming Sinclair Broadcasting documentary that will put a negative light on Kerry's military service is unquestionably a dirty Republican political trick. The thing that is outrageous about it is the fact that they are going to have their 62 affiliates "Pre-empt" their prime-time programming to show this thing and portray it as "News" worthy. Don't get me wrong - I'm certainly not saying they should not run it - they have the right to. It's the fact that they are trying say that it is important "News". I mean I thought that we were beyond this - weeks ago (military service). It keeps rearing its ugly head.

Meanwhile, the top U.S. Commander in Iraq pleaded with the Pentagon for critical supplies to counter the growing insurgency. Lt. General Ricardo Sanchez argued that without increased supplies, "I cannot continue to support sustained combat operations." The day after General Sanchez wrote his letter, George Bush went out and told the American people our troops were properly equipped. So Bush effectively "Lied" (or most likely just didn't know) when he said in the first debate - "Our generals on the ground said they have everything they needed" (paraphrasing). And what do you think about the "Bulge" in Bush's back in the first debate? I guess the reception wasn't that good in the earpiece. Rove wasn't getting through.

Despite all of the political (controversies) that have developed since the debates, one thing is pretty clear. Kerry looked and sounded more "Presidential", and had generally a better command of the issues. However, all of that does not excuse Kerry's misgivings - as they are also evident. But the only thing Bush really has to run on is "Security". His entire speech today in New Jersey was evident of that. Neither Bush nor Kerry have not focused at all on the "Time bomb" of an economic crisis that is just round the corner.

[rsquirell]

Re. Sanchez....the American People expect the President to lie in matters of national security...you never want to alert your enemies to your weaknesses or tell the enemy what your next move will be. The fact that a lot of intelligence matters going thru committees is being exposed by committee members who step up and selectively disclose that information for partisan political gain is really looked upon as aiding the enemy...and the democrats are looking more and more like the party of treason. Sinclair decided to air Stolen Honor when Michael Moore announced a pay-for-view of Farenheight 911 on election eve. Now that Moore has announced he'll pull his movie Sinclair may do the same. I polished that "vacation" film I posted earlier, and sent it to them. I'd like to post it here...but Admin has to give his approval. Kerry's Viet Nam service is what he's running on...it's the centerpiece of his campaign...and the fact that it's phony and that he collaborated with the enemy needs to come out. America doesn't need a traitor in the White House during time of war.

[ormonde]

"Now that Moore has announced he'll pull his movie Sinclair may do the same"

It still looks as if they are going to run it. See here:

http://money.cnn.com/2004/10/18/news/midcaps/sinclair_kerry/

[admin]

What do you all make of this then:

http://www.geocities.com/electionmodel/

Kerry with a 98% chance of winning based on mathematical models?

This site has a good rundown on the electoral votes:

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

As for the Zogby poll, wasn't it the only one that predicted Gore would have more votes than Bush (not including votes not counted in Florida), thus making it the most accurate in 2000?

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh2gen1.htm

(Reuters/MSNBC Tracking Poll conducted by Zogby)

[rsquirell]

rasmussen has them in a dead heat now....but with the electorial college favoring bush ( www.rasmussenreports.com )for what it's worth...the attached CNN/Gallup poll has bush up by 8. The thing to watch is the questions who would make a better leader, who do you trust on security, and who do you trust on the economy. Altough rasmussen has had him down by as much as 10+ points in recent months, bush has never trailed in response to these questions. The people are voting more against bush than for Kerry...and the more they get to know about kerry, the less enthusiastic they are about voting. The thing to remember about polls is that at least 20% of those called hang up. PS...i wish you'd allow .rtf (rich text format)...these attachments lose their formatting when converted to text.

[admin]

CNN/Gallup has seems to be the odd poll out in most of the recent polls, always seem to predict a landslide win for Bush, or has big movements that smells like "bad polling". For example, if Gallup is accurate, we are to believe Bush's winning margin has increased from -2 to +8 (a 10% movement!!) in the space of a week.

I think I've read somewhere about Gallup's polling methods being extremely unreliable, and that Zogby was the most accurate based on it's sampling method, which can skew the result one way or the other if not done carefully. I read one scientific poll (from a "respected" news source) that had a sample where only 8% of the people were in the age range 18 to 34, and 12% were over 75!!

Of course, I don't think any of the polls are accurate enough to base any sort of prediction on, unless there is more than a 20% margin between any two candidates. The state by state electoral predictions are better, but not by much.

And it's all about how newly registered voters will vote. A 2 to 1 Kerry split (based on historical data, this is very likely) will mean President Kerry given the current polls out, but the closer it gets to 1 to 1, the more likely Bush will remain President. And Bush's job approval rating should be a concern as well (down to 44% in the Times/CBS poll). Based on low approval rating, I can't see undecideds getting out to vote for Bush, but then again I don't see how any undecideds will vote at all if they're still undecided now.

Elections are exciting, aren't they?