Will you accept it if the other guy wins on Tuesday?

The Meal · Post by **The Meal** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 9:26 am

Poleaxe wrote:
And I'm not sure what you are referring to on electoral-vote.com - I just went there, and according to the map on their main page, It's Kerry 45 - Bush 44. That's a one point lead in a state that Gore carried by 16 points.

NJ isn't the only state with dramatic changes towards Bush. HI is running an 18 point reversal right now. It's unusual happenings like this that convince me that we don't know jack, and won't until the election.

And *that's* the conclusion I support. As Meghan has implied, the polling process needs some serious updating to catch up with the times.

~Neal

Crabbs · Post by **Crabbs** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 9:31 am

YellowKing wrote:
And Kerry should have walked away with this election if Bush's presidency was as "disastrous" as the left makes it out to be.

Fact is GWB is the incumbent with the power of the presidency behind him and can't run away with it..... Keep dreaming that your guy is looking oh so good. You honestly can't tell me that you thought this race was gonna be this close at this last stage.

CeeKay · Post by **CeeKay** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 9:34 am

I'm getting the Bush as Hitler and Kerry with a footbal pics all ready to go for whoever wins

jblank · Post by **jblank** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 10:19 am

If Kerry loses, I wont be happy, especially if Bush continues to exercise the same foreign policies he has during the last 2 years. That said, I am not going to go on a cursing rampage, nor am I going to be actively seeking Prozac.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 10:24 am

Quinnipac has consistently given GWB the highest poll #'s in a lot of states, especially in NJ. If another poll comes out to confirm this I'd buy it, but right now all the other recent polls show Kerry +4-6 over bBush.

Except that they don't, which is why I pointed out that despite Fireball's assertion, electoral-vote.com has NJ as a 1 point race. And they aren't using the Quinnipiac numbers.

Also RM9 GWB should have walked away with this election if things were so hunky-dorey. I bet the Repubs are sweating more than the Dems because an incumbent should never poll as low as GWB is polling.

Why? The country is split right down the middle and both sides are chock full of partisan venom. Why would anyone expect this to be anything but a close race - regardless of how well things are going/

Baseball teams have NEVER come back from a 3-0 deficit in a league championship series. Except that now they did.

Historically, I'm pretty sure that it's always not a good thing when states that were supposed to be your strongholds are now 1-point or 0-point races.

Maybe this year I'll be wrong, and losing support in what is supposed to be one of your strongholds will turn out to be a positive.

Imagine if Texas was a 1-point race and I was telling you that this meant big things, and that I thought it was indicative of a GWB blowout. You'd look at me like I had three heads.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 10:30 am

For reference, in August, Kerry PNW3D New Jersey. He had about a 52 to 33 point lead.

That's now a 45 to 44 point lead (I *think* electoral-vote.com is using the Strategic Vision numbers for that). The Rasmussin poll that shows the 7 point lead looks to be from a week or two ago.

That's old news yo.

FWIW, Gore got to his popular vote lead by having monstrous leads in states like NJ. If Kerry doesn't get that, and it looks like he certainly won't be getting the 16 point win that Gore enjoyed - that will change the national numbers somewhat.

And here's another point that the "This is the best news ever for Kerry!" folks should realize about my crappy state.

Consider me for instance. In a state where Kerry has a 16 point lead, I'm not all that inclined to vote, since there's not much of a point. But in a 1-point race or 0-point race with 6-7% undecideds? You can be damn sure that I will be in the voting booth, with bells on.

Tight races in states that should have been completely in Kerry's camp will motivate Bush supporters to the polls. I know that Bush picked up 4 votes because the race is this tight here, that he probably wouldn't have gotten if he was maintaining the lead that Gore had.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 10:40 am

Well, one thing this election seems to have done better than any in the past is actually break down partisanship IMO. I think the last two years has really given the populace a high dose of bipartisan disgust.

This will set us up for a test election next cycle though. The parties now know that they can really test the waters to see who they can put forward and get the populace to vote for them in spite of who they are, because even with the bipartisan disgust there is still a feeling of having to protect the illusion of "your way."

Crabbs · Post by **Crabbs** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 10:46 am

RM9 I understand where you are coming, I don't think Kerry is gonna run away with this it's gonna be close, but looking at YK's statements that people don't want to change Prez during a war, that the economy is great, GWB should be running away with it, just isn't happening.

Yeah if those #'s in NJ are real they aren't good, but turn it around to states that GWB should be winning easily (CO, WV, OH) and isn't just gives the Dems the same hope. Your argument cuts both ways. Oh and for the Strategic Vision (R) poll in NJ, I'd be highly suspicous since its partisan. I'd more likely buy Quinnipac but woul like another non-partisan to confirm that tie.

On a side note does GWB pay for mileage on Airforce One? (Honest question)

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 10:50 am

Crabbs wrote:On a side note does GWB pay for mileage on Airforce One? (Honest question)

No, no President does - whether they're campaigning or sitting on the tarmac getting haircuts.

And MI and IO as well, both states that Gore carried, but remain tied (in the polls at least), both states that Gore carried.

I didn't mean to imply that you also thought that Kerry was going to run away with it - that was directed at Meghan.

Crabbs · Post by **Crabbs** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 10:57 am

See we all can get along

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 11:02 am

I can't see Bush winning Michigan. Unless the Bush vote is very rural and turns out in overwhelming numbers. The thing with Michigan rural voters is that they tend to be pretty libertarian more than straight conservative (Michigan Militia, anyone?), so I imagine that as much as they would hate Kerry, Bush is no friend of theirs either.

The Kerry ads are picking up like crazy here, too. But they seem to be more of a make sure you get up off your ass and vote campaign rather than a "my guy is the guy campaign." That is the smart move IMO. Every time horse face opens his mouth he has a way of pissing off everyone buy his campaigners.

Eco-Logic · Post by **Eco-Logic** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 11:04 am

I love this thread.

The tone is great and I actually agreed with fireball in it.

Dramatist · Post by **Dramatist** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 11:11 am

I'll accept whoever wins. I'll echo some others that I want the winner on Nov. 2 and not a month down the road.

I don't think who wins will make a big difference to American life unless there is some national emergency. I would value Bush's leadership over Kerry's weasellyship in such an emergency.

jblank · Post by **jblank** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 11:11 am

Crabbs wrote:See we all can get along

Absolutely. Really, there is no need for all the mean spiritedness and hostility over the candidates. Of course there will be things that they do to upset us, and things we STRONGLY disagree with, but I dont feel the need to hate or think less of people that disagree with me and my politics. Bush, even though I disagree with a number of his beliefs, is probably a good man, that believes he is doing what is best for the country. I happen to disagree with the direction he is taking us, but I dont hate him, I dont wish him any ill will, and I certainly dont envy what he has had to go through since 9/11. In the end, both sides want America to be great, safe, and prosperous.

SuperHiro · Post by **SuperHiro** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 11:11 am

No matter who becomes president, they will have to preside over a country that's evenly split. And what's worse, for the most part both sides really really dislike the other. It's like the damn Grangerfords and Shepardsons.

It's either going to be pretty rough going, for smooth sailing due to gridlock.

As for me, I plan to hold my baby until she's asleep, then I'll make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. Then I'll check my email, make a few last minute edits to "ASK SUPERHIRO!" post it, then go to sleep. Then tomorrow, during the wait for the bus to work, I'll check out the Seattle Times headlines and see who won.

Then I'll go to work.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 11:12 am

RunningMn9 wrote:For reference, in August, Kerry PNW3D New Jersey. He had about a 52 to 33 point lead.

That's now a 45 to 44 point lead (I *think* electoral-vote.com is using the Strategic Vision numbers for that). The Rasmussin poll that shows the 7 point lead looks to be from a week or two ago.

That's old news yo.

If these numbers are accurate(I doubt it) it wouldn't be that huge a surprise. NJ has had Republicans swings now and then. I however think that the polling methods are just not up to date. I know 10 people in the 25-35 range(including myself) who've gone cell phone only and are voting Kerry. None of us are available for polling.

I'm willing to bet that a lot of people are going that route. My anecdotal evidence is the new phone book I got 2 days ago -- The new phone book is easily 1/3 if not 1/2 smaller than the old phone book from just 2 years ago. I was sceptical about the cell phone polling error that Dems were trumpeting until I saw that phonebook sitting at my front door. My brother has Optimum Voice. I work with 2 guys with Vonage. Their numbers are basically unpublished and unavailable for polling.

I think this might be the year that the pollsters are going to be shocked that they were so far off(in NJ at the very least). Though they are enfranchising Republicans to go out and vote which will definitely narrow the vote, I still think we'll see a 5 or 6 point Kerry victory.

* Edit to remark that the phone book I got covers the Dover, NJ area only. YMMV in other areas of the Garden State.

The Meal · Post by **The Meal** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 11:30 am

Utilizing data from this page (and it's preceding friends), with all the caveats listed there.

Remember it's 270 for teh winn!!1!

FWIW. Personally I think little. But a webpage with that amount of data is a dangerous thing for an engineer waiting for an email.

~Neal

Eco-Logic · Post by **Eco-Logic** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 11:35 am

malchior wrote:
Though they are enfranchising Republicans to go out and vote which will definitely narrow the vote, I still think we'll see a 5 or 6 point Kerry victory.

That is classic. I've heard it all now.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 11:44 am

Eco-Logic wrote:
malchior wrote:
Though they are enfranchising Republicans to go out and vote which will definitely narrow the vote, I still think we'll see a 5 or 6 point Kerry victory.
That is classic. I've heard it all now.

How so?

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 1:01 pm

jblank wrote:Absolutely. Really, there is no need for all the mean spiritedness and hostility over the candidates. Of course there will be things that they do to upset us, and things we STRONGLY disagree with, but I dont feel the need to hate or think less of people that disagree with me and my politics. Bush, even though I disagree with a number of his beliefs, is probably a good man, that believes he is doing what is best for the country. I happen to disagree with the direction he is taking us, but I dont hate him, I dont wish him any ill will, and I certainly dont envy what he has had to go through since 9/11. In the end, both sides want America to be great, safe, and prosperous.

What I really hope is that the election can pass into history, and regardless of which one of these f-tards screws the country further into the ground, the debate around these parts can return to the passionate debate of issues.

I've gotten so weary of the "Bush is TEH SUCK!" and "Kerry is a horse-headed Frenchman!" (oh wait, that was mine

) threads.

I can't even have a genuine discussion about current events like the explosives issue without being accused of trying to protect the current ape in the WH. I just want to get to the bottom of the issue, and you can't.

Back when I used to post uphill, both ways, in the snow - we could talk about issues, and not the candidates (or even necessarily the parties). I just pray to my Overlords that we can get back to that.

And if Kerry is going to win - for the love of PETE, please win on Nov. 2.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 1:06 pm

malchior wrote:* Edit to remark that the phone book I got covers the Dover, NJ area only. YMMV in other areas of the Garden State.

I keep forgetting that you're only like 5 minutes from where I work.

I wonder though - have we ever seen any polling data to suggest that there is a preponderance of Kerry supporters that are casting off the shackles of the POTS?

Even if we can say that demographically it's mostly young people that tend to support Kerry. They vote far less strenuously than old coots still loving it up on their land line.

The charge seems to me at least, at this point, to be Dems grasping at straws to explain these bad numbers, while still ignoring the "My boss is a weasel" straw.

But, hopefully all mysteries will be solved by next Wednesday morning.

Crabbs · Post by **Crabbs** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 1:34 pm

RunningMn9 wrote:
Even if we can say that demographically it's mostly young people that tend to support Kerry. They vote far less strenuously than old coots still loving it up on their land line.

and such will be the deciding factor. Can the 20 somethings actually motivate to go vote.... not the surething I would count on if I were Kerry, but also something I wouldn't cout out if I were Bush.

SuperHiro · Post by **SuperHiro** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 1:40 pm

Being a 20-something myself who still occasionally watches Mtv... the atmosphere is very different from 2000. In 2000 it was "bah, both candidates are the same, what's the point?"

That's clearly not going on right now. I think the "cell phone effect" is real. Perhaps overstated a bit... but it's very real.

Guy Incognito · Post by **Guy Incognito** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 2:06 pm

At this point, I'm agreeing with several people in this thread. Whatever happens, I hope it is decisive so everyone can move on with their lives.

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 6:55 pm

If things are as close as predicted (and I'm skeptical because, all things considered, the press have been extremely easy on President G.W. Bush), at least I'll be busy at the office all next week. Sure, I'll get out early to vote on Tuesday to keep up the Chicago voting tradition (early and often), but hopefully things will have sorted themselves out by Friday.

Anonymous Bosch · Post by **Anonymous Bosch** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 9:06 pm

I was amazed to hear on the radio the other day that Bush is currently running only seven points behind Kerry even here in California.

Kinda makes you wonder if it would have been possible for Bush to further close the gap if he and Schwarzenegger had actually put any effort into campaigning here.

Anonymous Bosch · Post by **Anonymous Bosch** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 9:22 pm

Crabbs wrote:
RunningMn9 wrote:
Even if we can say that demographically it's mostly young people that tend to support Kerry. They vote far less strenuously than old coots still loving it up on their land line.
and such will be the deciding factor. Can the 20 somethings actually motivate to go vote.... not the surething I would count on if I were Kerry, but also something I wouldn't cout out if I were Bush.

I heard Karl Rove has a cunning plan to handle votes from the 20-somethings that involves air-dropping a whole bunch of shiny objects.

The Mad Hatter · Post by **The Mad Hatter** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 10:17 pm

Anonymous Bosch wrote:I was amazed to hear on the radio the other day that Bush is currently running only seven points behind Kerry even here in California.

Kinda makes you wonder if it would have been possible for Bush to further close the gap if he and Schwarzenegger had actually put any effort into campaigning here.

Arnie's a savvy guy, I think it'd serve his presidential ambitions more if Kerry was elected. With the Bush family out of the picture, if Kerry stumbles during his first term he's perfectly positioned to get that constitutional amendment passed and step up to the plate. Alternately he plays the moderate GOP governor until 2012 and takes the nomination by acclamation. It worked for Reagan - a Ford victory in 1976 would probably have eliminated any chance of him ever becoming President.

Faldarian · Post by **Faldarian** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 11:28 pm

Zarathud wrote: ...(and I'm skeptical because, all things considered, the press have been extremely easy on President G.W. Bush)...

You know, it's been the same story here in a bad way.

The local television station has been using Pew Poll results almost exclusively in the news broadcasts. When Bush was in town, it was everywhere; they talked about it for a third of the news each night he came. Kerry was here Wednesday, and it pretty much came down to "Kerry attacked Bush on the missing weapons in Iraq, and oh yeah, he was in town today I think".

It's frustrating. I'd settle for biased, even, it's been outright campaigning on some days.

Anyway, I think the vote will come down to :

a) Independents, including former Nader voters

b) The newly registered and younger voters, as long as they show up to vote.

c) Undecideds. More than 2/3 of them that have been polled have said that the country is on the wrong track when asked and traditionally go with the challenger in tight race situations.

d) Bush is polling just below where he finished in 2000; he hasn't picked up new supporters, unless you want to buy the wild and inexplicable poll shifts in Hawaii, etc. of late that don't match any trends or detailed polling.

e) I'm just guessing entirely. I don't think the polls have been fully accurate, or will be on election day. I'm frankly more concerned with voter fraud between the election machines and the crap in Florida than I am with Bush being re-elected, but mostly because I doubt that he would be without fraud involved. Call me jaded, I guess.

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Sun Oct 31, 2004 2:36 am

Sure I can handle it. Not so sure if the environment can handle four more years though.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Sun Oct 31, 2004 2:38 am

triggercut · Post by **triggercut** » Sun Oct 31, 2004 11:40 am

If Bush wins on Tuesday, I'll feel the same way that I did when he won in 2000: disappointed, but hopeful that things will be better.

I had really hoped that the George Bush who was governor of Texas would be the George Bush we got as President back in 2000, but his once-famous ability to get along with and unite folks from both sides of the aisle started disappearing almost immediately when he put John Ashcroft in as AG, and things just sort of polarized from there.

I think The President is trending upwards in battleground states, and it now becomes a matter of which party does a better job with GOTV.

I'm an American, and as such I'll always reserve the right to be a snarky bitch about whomever our Chief Exec is...

...whomever wins, here's hoping the next four years are a good ones.