Job Discussion Forums

[kev7161]

It looks like "W" is pulling ahead in the polls when it comes to who will win the title of president in the US. This means four more years of hiding under our beds, wondering what new terror this man can unleash on our country and the world. I'll be glued to my CNN watching the coverage of the debates in October, but I think Kerry really, really needs to get off the attacks to Bush and to also ignore these inane attacks coming at him. Speak on what his policies will be and what he will do once he's in the White House. Why do politicians think we want to see and hear the mudslinging and why do so many citizens and voters think these taunts and insults are the gospel truth?

. . . and quite frankly, I could care less about military service some 30+ years ago. The Vietnam era was a crazy time for everyone (I was just a wee lad at that time) . . . it means nothing in today's world.

[kimo]

I'm sure some of the staunch Bush supporters will rush to their keys and tell us how they have told us so. But, really it is too soon to tell anything at this point.

Yes, some polls do show a wide lead for Bush. There are others that show a statistical dead heat. As I understand it, there are some very under represented people in the polls, namely people who no longer have land lines (cell phone users) and university students who have unpublished numbers. One military parent told me he felt that perhaps some scare tactic was involved. I wouldn't go that far.

Seemingly down does not mean out. Kerry and Anybody-But-Bush supporters must not make the mistake of just giving up because they believe everything they read. Only the November 2nd poll counts.

---

Now for a little story involving Howard K. Smith, former ABC News anchorman. In 1936 he was young and a high hurdler. At that time, track and field athletes qualified for the Olympics by first making it through regional meets. Smith, upon finishing the first and his only heat in his southern regional picked up his spikes and went home. He had only been nicked by a nose. He figured if he hadn't won this early on surely he wouldn't do much better considering all the races to run before the Olympic final.

The man who beat him, and who may well have only had a longer nose, won the gold at Berlin that year.

---

We can now see what kind of mettle Kerry is really made of.

[justcolleen]

I ignore what polls have to say, for good reason. I've worked on several local campaigns in the past, and I've helped construct and conduct polls. Thus, I know how it works: It's all about who you ask the questions to. Trust me, there's a way to do it.

Poller: Good evening. This is (alias) from (name of polling company which we created), and I would like to ask you a few questions about the election.

Joe Six-Pack: Sure.

Poller: Thank you. Are you over the age of 18?

Joe Six-Pack: Yes.

Poller: Are you a registered voter?

Joe Six-Pack: Yes.

Poller: Did you vote in the 2000 Presidential election?

Joe Six-Pack: No.

Poller: Are you planning to vote in the 2004 Presidential election?

Joe Six-Pack: I'm not sure.

Poller: Thank you for your time. Buh, bye.

Poller terminates the call.

Why? Because Poller is only interested in soliciting answers from LIKELY VOTERS. Poller then continues down the list of whatever type of demographic that the company bought from the appropriate government entity, and makes another call.

Yes, BOUGHT. The particular candidate I supported had, as part of his campaign platform, topics of interest to property owners. Thus, our list was comprised of only people who were property owners, our target audience.

We polled until we got enough of the answers we were looking for, let our candidate release a statement that mirrored what the polled audience supported, released the information to the media, and waited for the other candidates (incumbants and challengers alike) to try and defend themselves from their constituancy.

It worked, and that's how polls, in general, work as well. They are, by no means, accurate in terms of truly representative opinion, but of the opinion of those who happened to complete the poll. They are NEVER comprehensive and ALWAYS serve a specific purpose.

Colleen

[The Great Wall of Whiner]

Here's a secret:

I was involved heavily in politics in Canada.

I know stats, and I know figures.

I hate to say it, but:

Looking at the percentages, facts and numbers (I could really get into it, the macro and micro political science and math involved) it looks lke a GWB win.

In a nutshell:

There is Nader. He will make close states go Bush due to a split vote. He is now on the ballot in Florida.

Fear. People vote emotionally, not logically. Republicans use fear to their advantage. They often talk about emotional subjects. Things that pull our worst fears (terror, murder, rape, crime, abortion, etc.) Democrats tend to talk logically. The future. Ecology. Environment. Fairness. Justice. Etc.

When Average Joe Schmoe goes to the ballot box, he becomes emotional.

Bush has the money. The machine. The team. The entire government's resources at his disposal.

Uphill battle for Kerry.

Ultimately, Ohio and Florida will be the big sayers as to who is Prez.

My prediction:

Kerry will win the popular vote, Bush the electoral vote (just like 2000).

I have a question to Americans:

Why would you guys make a democracy where the majority of people chose "A" but "B" gets elected? I don't get it..even with my experienced political background...

[nolefan]

What doesn't help is that there are 3 conflicting reports/polls out at the same time: one claims Bush has a narrow lead and is loosing momentum, the second claims a standstill and the last one claims that Bush is gaining momentum... Which one you gonna believe?

The thing with polls is that they are not really representative when you think about it.. Just try to remembder those statistics classes from college.

I understand you concerns, Kevin. I am lucky enough to have FoxNews on satellite so I've been following all the polling. I am just hoping that there are a bunch of undecided voters that will turn out in force on D day. My wife and I decided a while back that we will not go back to the U.S. 'till W. gets kicked out of office.

[ls650]

[Seth]

from what i've seen there are two types of polls. most polls still show a dead heat, a few show bush with as much as a 10 point lead. it was explained that if a person is asked right away which candidate to vote for, bush leads. if the positions on the issues are presented with each candidates take on them, and then ask who to vote for, kerry has the advantage.

if people hear the message, kerry wins, which is why the spin machine is busy with this vietnam garbage and bush refuses to debate kerry. we all know bush would fail miserably in a debate with kerry, even his handlers know that.

personally, though, i have a feeling in my gut that bush will win and nader may possibly help that happen.

just hope that the informed people outnumber the mayonaise sandwich eating yokels who will vote bush because 'he ain't no que*r' on election day.

[moonraven]

I have almost zero confidence in US voters' ability to make a rational choice--in the voting booth, or anywhere else. I think in this case Tweedledee is a LITTLE less dangerous than Tweedledumb--they both represent the same big money folks, but Dee is neither retarded nor nuts and therefore less likely to wake up one morning and bomb the crap out of another country because counting his toes has become boring.

I am going to spend the next month in the US working against Bush in rural areas. It may be a futile effort, but at least nobody will be able to blame ME for not trying to do something about the political state of disaster in the US....

[Stephen Jones]

If Bush is going to win it won't be by outspending the Dems. You'll find that both parities are spending more or less the same, and if you work out that people are actually paying to see anti-Bush political propaganda with Moore's Orwellian Party Political Broadcast actually being the highest grossing movie in the States last year, then it looks like the Dems are going to have to find another excuse.

Incidentally winning the popular vote but losing the government is quite common in the UK. In 1950 Labour got a majority in Parliament with less popular votes than the conservatives; a year later the reverse ocurred and Labout got more votes than the Conservative but the latter got a comfortable Parliamentary majority. Unlike the US Dems, neither Churchill nor Atlee made the least move to change the rules 'a posteriori'.

[mesmerod]

a bush win=more money in my pocket.

go bush!

[dmb]

[leeroy]

George W Bush is an idiot.

I am tired of him, but not nearly as tired as I am of those that (relentlessly) complain about him.

A short-cut to looking clever is to complain about the US administration and relate this to all of the problems currently facing the world. Things are more complicated than that.

[mesmerod]

leeroy,
you hit the nail on the head!


i have yet to meet anyone who likes his policies, yet the relentless whiners and bush-bashers are even worse.


excuse-makers love to point all the problems towards mr bush.


someone asked why i said that a bush presidency means i will have more money.....well it has to do with the republican economic policies that foster economic growth, lower tax brackets, and small business expansion. in the short term (ie next 4 years), i think my investments will create more wealth with bush as president then kerry. there is also something to be said for continuity....
if you arent invested in the markets or actively trying to turn money into more money, then you most likely favor kerry's superficial pseudo-platform that he himself cannot explain in any detail.
so the bottom line is that i am expecting a huge return on my investments when bush wins this election....less uncertainty=more money for everyone. then i can pay my debts and get the hell out of here and pursue something that actually makes me happy.

[dmb]

[stillnosheep]

mesmerised