John Kerry Democratic Nominee?

[Jedi Master Carr]

Kerry Won 5 states yesterday and he has a huge lead delegates wise. He is also leading in polls in Michigan, Washington and Tennessee. It looks like he will be the nominee unless a drastic change in events. The question is can he win? I think he could it is hard to say at this point. I think it will be close election at the moment. I am sure though the Republicans will put the Massachusett liberal label on him. Altough I don't see him really that liberal, (he supports gun rights for example and owns guns himself) he is also a War hero so there will be some problems in doing that. I still think the best thing to happen would be a Kerry-Edwards ticket (if Edwards gives in and takes the nominee) That works best,IMO

[Marcus Telcontar]

Please please please, anyone but Dean.

Then all you democrats and others who want Bush out, get behind Kerry and get active. Get people out and voting. Get the Bush Regime changed.


form what i understand, Kerry or Clark would be the Republican's nightmare as you cant really use Patriotism and defending the country against people who actually put themselves ont he line doing just that. With National security becomming a non issue, then it reverts to other issues, issues Bush could well be weak on... like that massive defiect.

If Clinton got hauled over the coals for getting his penis sucked, then why should Bush escape the wrath of a public lied to and misled over somethign much, much more serious?

[Jedi Master Carr]

Well said, Dean is a moron and he is done. I have no clue why he keeps on fighting. Clark has no hope now he has shown he is very inexperience in politics. Edwards is young looking and a very good speaker but I don't think he is ready, he would be a great VP IMO.

[Figrin D'an]

Originally posted by Marcus Elessar
If Clinton got hauled over the coals for getting his penis sucked, then why should Bush escape the wrath of a public lied to and misled over somethign much, much more serious?


Because the nature of the voting public in the United States is one to make misconduct of the type in which Clinton engaged a major issue. Be it right or wrong, when people think of the words "morality" and "character," things done in one's personal life tend to be of greater consequence of those purely in the political area. Reagan made a lot of questionable calls over his two terms, and the deficit ballooned while he was in office. Yet, he remains one of the most popular Presidents in US history. Why? He had convictions, and he stuck to them. He didn't take crap from anyone, and he made sure that American public knew that, no matter what decisions he made, he was doing what he believed was right for the American people. And a great many people respected that, even if they didn't agree with some of his policies.


Even with the negative press currently circulation about Iraq, the WMD mess, the cost of the war on terrorism, the election will hinge upon one factor, which really isn't the fault, positive or negative, of any sitting President: the economy. If the economy shows steady improvements and unemployment goes down, Bush will likely win re-election. The public will give him the opportunity to "complete the job" regarding Iraq, among other things. If the economy waivers, and the beginning of a bull market isn't seen by November, Kerry (or whomever) will have a chance at beating him.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Well right now Bush is unpopular the last poll had him at 49% which is not very good, Clinton was never that low. Plus I see no signs of the economy improving. I know alot of people who are still out of work and can't find a good job.

[Marcus Telcontar]

Because the nature of the voting public in the United States is one to make misconduct of the type in which Clinton engaged a major issue. Be it right or wrong, when people think of the words "morality" and "character," things done in one's personal life tend to be of greater consequence of those purely in the political area

I wish I had a response to deny that.... but on the evidence, your right and that sucks.

[Figrin D'an]

Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr
Well right now Bush is unpopular the last poll had him at 49% which is not very good, Clinton was never that low. Plus I see no signs of the economy improving. I know alot of people who are still out of work and can't find a good job.


There are experts who would disagree with you greatly.


But that's not the point.


The election isn't until November. A lot can happen in nine months to swing things one way or the other.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Well that is true. Right now Bush looks beatable, there was a CNN poll that had Kerry at 53% to 46% for Bush. Now that could be because Kerry is everywhere right now which would help him. My main point is I think the election will be close who will win, I don't know at this point.

[Figrin D'an]

Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr
Now that could be because Kerry is everywhere right now which would help him.


Precisely. This is generally the case with elections. In '96, Dole actually lead Clinton in certain straw polls during the primaries. When November came, he didn't have a snowballs chance in hell of unseating Clinton.

Once the Democratic National Convention is over and they have their candidate, and once Bush starts his own road trips for his campaign, things will even out quite a bit. Then the race will be on.

[Charley]

Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr

Plus I see no signs of the economy improving. I know alot of people who are still out of work and can't find a good job.

It's been improving by leaps and bounds since last June, and isn't really open for debate.

As for unemployment, that's going to be an issue in either bear or bull markets alike. It takes time for that progress indicator to improve, given other economic improvements.

[Charley]

Originally posted by Marcus Elessar
I wish I had a response to deny that.... but on the evidence, your right and that sucks.

The issue wasn't fellatio. That's neither here nor there. The issue was perjury.

[JediBoricua]

Actually Charlie, although the economic growth since July has been on a steady climb, the unemployment rate and the job created since then have not.

On the last trimester only 1000 jobs were created in all the United States. Experts are calling the current state of the economy as 'jobless growth'. Add that to the thousands of jobs being exported from the US, especially from the midwest and the tech sector, to cheaper labor markets like India. Big numbers and a bull market dont mean squat to an unemployed worker struggling to make ends meet. Unless this greatly improves the economy will be THE issue come November.

Deficit is another factor that can't be taken lighty, a huge deficit will keep the dollar going down (to levels lower than what the administration wants it), and will force the FED to raise interest rates which could kill a recovery.

We are seeing the light at the end of the tunnel, but we are not out yet and it could take a few months, maybe even a year.

[Sith Ahnk]

Originally posted by Charley
The issue wasn't fellatio. That's neither here nor there. The issue was perjury.

Were perjury a problem, I defy you to bring me three weapons of mass destruction with a side of fries and a large coke. kthxbye

[CMJ]

I've said it before....the only Democrat that I think can beat President Bush is Edwards. Kerry vs Bush will be extremely close, but I think the Prez will win in almost an exact replay of '00.

Edwards would keep most(if not all) of the blue states...and he CAN compete in the South. I really don't think Kerry can or will. Especially if he continues to have Kennedy campaining with him.

I may not live in the South anymore...but I am from there. Kennedy is reviled like the plague there. The GOP will lop Kerry in with the senior senator from Mass. & Kerry is just making it easier on them already.

[JediBoricua]

Right now I think the best combo for the DNC would be a Kerry-Edwards ticket. Kerry has the military experience and inspires confidence among voters IMO, and Edwards rounds up the vital souther vote.

On the other hand, Kerry has been in Congress for a long time and hasn't been a standout senator until recently. He is an insider and has ties to big business, being a millionaire himself. Bush appeals more to the people and he doesn't seem like an aristocrat like Kerry.

It will be an interesting race, and like Figrin says, by this time Dole lead Clinton in the polls, it's really too early to say. Remember that Bush will have twice the money that any candidate the Dems can field, so I say as of today W still has the advantage.

[Sanis Prent]

Originally posted by Sith Ahnk
Were perjury a problem, I defy you to bring me three weapons of mass destruction with a side of fries and a large coke. kthxbye

Find a transcript of such a claim under oath, Captain Clever.

[CMJ]

Actually, even with Edwards on the ticket, I'm not sure Kerry can compete in the South. If I were him I'd ask Gephardt(good God, did I say that? You know how uninspiring I think he is). Gephardt lets you compete for the battleground midwestern states...those the Dems won and lost in '00. I think Gephardt might win you the election with the Midwestern strategy.

[Sanis Prent]

Originally posted by JediBoricua
Actually Charlie, although the economic growth since July has been on a steady climb, the unemployment rate and the job created since then have not.

On the last trimester only 1000 jobs were created in all the United States. Experts are calling the current state of the economy as 'jobless growth'. Add that to the thousands of jobs being exported from the US, especially from the midwest and the tech sector, to cheaper labor markets like India. Big numbers and a bull market dont mean squat to an unemployed worker struggling to make ends meet. Unless this greatly improves the economy will be THE issue come November.

Deficit is another factor that can't be taken lighty, a huge deficit will keep the dollar going down (to levels lower than what the administration wants it), and will force the FED to raise interest rates which could kill a recovery.

We are seeing the light at the end of the tunnel, but we are not out yet and it could take a few months, maybe even a year.

Please find where I said otherwise. I didn't. Unemployment is one of the slowest economic indicators to respond to change stimuli. My entire point is that you can't claim the economy's in a slump simply because the u rate hasn't reacted yet.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I agree Kerry-Edwards is the best combo. I don't think Edwards can even win the nomination his message just doesn't work outside the south. Also I don't think Kennedy will be campaigning for him that much I think he was mostly doing that to revive his campaign. Also I don't think Kerry has to win a southern state. If he can win Missouri and Arizona (both which Gore almost won) he will the presidency.

[CMJ]

I don't believe Kerry will win AZ. But my Gephardt point is VERY valid if you need Missouri. :p

I don't think Kerry can compete in the South...even with Edwards.

[JediBoricua]

True, but imagine the vice-presidential debates between Cheney and Edwards. Clear advantage for Edwars IMO. He looks young and energetic, and has a refreshing feeling to him (sounds like a mouthwash ad!). He has not attacked any of his contenders and that has earned him love from the media and the public. Consider that he is still seen as a contender to Kerry, after winning only one state, yet Clark who also won one state is seen as being 'out'. That's media love if you ask me.

A Gephart-Cheney debate will put me to sleep before the second round of questions.

[Sanis Prent]

Kerry is simply too inflammatory to be a viable candidate for the Dems, IMO.

If you can't embrace the swing vote, and if you can't overcome geography, you're screwed.

[JediBoricua]

Originally posted by Sanis Prent
Please find where I said otherwise. I didn't. Unemployment is one of the slowest economic indicators to respond to change stimuli. My entire point is that you can't claim the economy's in a slump simply because the u rate hasn't reacted yet.

I understand that, and you are right that unemployment rate suffers from statistical lag. Yet the job created stat is recent and does not suffer from any lag, and that has no growth.

[CMJ]

Yes, but we're counting states now. If you have a northeastern Senator - who has been in D.C. for years, I just don't think you can win in the South..even with Edwards.

If you're Kerry...write off the South...work like hell to keep all of Gore's states...and let Gephardt win you Missouri.

That's how you win the big map.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I think with Edwards you can win North Carolina, and maybe somehow get Florida, Florida is the only winable state in the south for a democrat. And Charley how is Kerry inflamatory.

[Sanis Prent]

Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr
And Charley how is Kerry inflamatory.

Considering that 80% of his platform is OMG BUSH HATE WRARR, its pretty much an issue of sound & fury. That, and he's quite on the take, and has been lining his pockets for years on the boston urban development projects.

[CMJ]

Layton...Edwards will not win you North Carolina. Jeb Bush will still deliver Florida for his brother. Edwards won't offer Kerry anything.

About Kerry being infammatory. He's not white hot like a Howard Dean, and he seems more of a moderate. His voting record is left of Clinton and he only took a few southern states. Kerry will have a tough time winning anything in the South.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I agree with you there Court Kerry is a moderate. And Charley he is coming out saying I hate Bush he is saying Bush is bad for the country I think if you are running against him you got to say that kind of stuff. You can't be nice and say he is good for the country can you. I think Florida is winnable. Gore just about won it, so it is possible. NC would be 50-50. Even though I say a Kerry-Edwards combo was best I am beginning to agree with you about Gephart.

[Sanis Prent]

Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr
I agree with you there Court Kerry is a moderate. And Charley he is coming out saying I hate Bush he is saying Bush is bad for the country I think if you are running against him you got to say that kind of stuff.

Let me rephrase. In addition to your anti-incumbant angst, its usually a good idea to build your campaign with viable alternatives. Kerry has not.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I think he has he has been touting health care, lower taxes for the middle class, getting rid of some of Bush's policie, and fixing up the situation with Iraq. You have to listen to his speeches and the debates to get that. I think you will hear more of his message when he is nominated.

[Sith Ahnk]

Under oath, state of the union.

Same thing.

A lie is a lie. Wether to the American courts or the American public is only different, apparently, if you're a Republican.

Although, I do cede to Charlie that Kerry hasn't really gone out and wowed me with his new policies. The only ones who seem radicals to me are Kusinich, who is now radical he never really had a chance, and Liberman, who is the wrong radical.

[Figrin D'an]

Originally posted by Sith Ahnk
Under oath, state of the union.

Same thing.

A lie is a lie. Wether to the American courts or the American public is only different, apparently, if you're a Republican.



No, it's not the same thing. Read up on the legal system, plz.

[CMJ]

Carr, you misuderstoof me. Kerry *seems* moderate, but his record suggests he's pretty left of center. Thats why I don't think he'll win in the south.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Oh I didn't see that, It doesn't matter to me there though I am slightly left of center myself :p Still if he can win Missouri and Ohio and the states Gore won, who cares about the South. I don't think Kennedy won a single southern state either (I would have to double check that).

[CMJ]

I know JFK won Texas.

[Charley]

^^^ Curses, CMJ!


Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr
Oh I didn't see that, It doesn't matter to me there though I am slightly left of center myself :p Still if he can win Missouri and Ohio and the states Gore won, who cares about the South. I don't think Kennedy won a single southern state either (I would have to double check that).

Considering Kennedy ran on the Democratic ticket back when the South voted heavily Democrat....what do you think?

He carried the majority of the South, actually.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I thought Wallace ran that year and took several states? Or am I thinking of 68? It would surprise me actually consider how anti-segeration Kennedy was, unless the Southerns didn't know that at the time.

[CMJ]

I wasn't sure how the whole south worked out, but I KNEW Kennedy won TX. ;) When Clinton won in 1992, it was the first time in like 100 years that a Democrat won the White House without carrying Texas.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Yeah it makes sense that he won Texas he had Johnson as his running mate, looks like Texas has switched parties although California has to some extent as well.

[ReaperFett]

Getting out my shovel, I did some light dirt digging on Kerry (Ok, I saw these on another site:))


http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/2/4/112807.shtml

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2004/02/05/politics0226EST0429.DTL&type=printable
"This is just business as usual in Washington," said Larry Noble, the former chief lawyer for the Federal Election Commission who now heads the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. "Kerry is out there saying he is not being part of that game, yet he is the product of the same money system."

With Kerry more vocally portraying himself on the presidential campaign trail as an opponent of special interest money in Washington, scrutiny of his dealings with donors and special interests has increased among his rivals and the news media.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Kerry is not the one who has brought this up. First it was General Clark who had Michael Moore introduce him and he said he was Awol then the democratic chairman didn't critize Moore and Clark enough. Kerry has been silent on this matter and has basically stayed out of which is probably the best thing. Let Clark stick his own foot in his mouth and ruin in his campaign.
About the Special interest most of the complaints about Kerry come over the Big Dig, in Boston. That is a very complicated matter. It has brought thousands of jobs to the state but construction problems has dragged in over two decades. There has been complaints about the way Kerry has kept the project alive but heck it is his state and I would suspect he would want to keep alive. If it was killed now it would be an even bigger waste of money, might as well finish the darn thing.
Also today Gehpardt has endorced Kerry this could also signal that Kerry might pick him for his VP.

[ReaperFett]

Some more:

http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200401220835.asp - Cares 28% of the time :)

http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/489/489738p1.html - The most shocking thing ever, he fights Dr Doom! :)

[Jedi Master Carr]

That is an ultra conservative paper there I wouldn't view anything from that thing as being fair.

[Sanis Prent]

Agreed. I'd take that with a grain of salt.

[Doc Milo]

Under oath, state of the union.

Same thing.

A lie is a lie. Wether to the American courts or the American public is only different, apparently, if you're a Republican.

Although, I do cede to Charlie that Kerry hasn't really gone out and wowed me with his new policies. The only ones who seem radicals to me are Kusinich, who is now radical he never really had a chance, and Liberman, who is the wrong radical.


First off, on the WMD issue, is it really a lie or just bad intelligence? Three countries (USA, Britian, and France) all had intelligence that stated that Iraq did, indeed, have WMDs. The Clinton administration before Bush also had intelligence that stated that Iraq had WMDs. It isn't a lie if you have the intelligence, go with it, and then later find out the intelligence was wrong...

Secondly, what Clinton did was more than perjury, but also obstruction of justice (on the hiding of the gifts issue) as well as suborning perjury. All these have the ultimate affect of one branch of government (the executive) undermining the effectiveness of another branch of government (the judiciary) -- and purposefully doing so, for these lies were constructed to do just that! This type of lie rips at the foundation of the American Constitutional System.

Ultimately Saddam Hussein had to be taken out of power, Bush just had the wherewithal to do it where others did not. I do believe he was funding the likes of Al Queda. At least Bush did it for what he believes to be necessary for the safety and security of the people of the our country and our allies, both here and abroad. This whole WMDs issue is a red herring. It's a way to attack Bush on the war and make him look bad. At least Bush didn't have some bad press and go out and bomb Hussein "Wag the Dog"-like (like Clinton did.) Bush put his presidency on the line for what he thinks is right. Agree or disagree, one must at least respect it.

I'd like to hear what Kerry would have done. Mr. "I'm against the war" yet when he had a chance, he voted for it. Would he have done what Clinton/Gore were doing before Bush got in. A policy full of sound and fury yet signifying nothing?

[Doc Milo]

On another point:

Never trust a Kennedy.

How Massachusetts keeps electing that slime-ball to the Senate is beyond me. The Kennedy's are the single most corrupt family in American politics (although the Clintons are coming in a close second) and Ted is the worst of the bunch. Here is a man that should be spending his life in a 4 X 6 iron-barred cell spelling of his own feces and instead Mass. sees fit to elect him to the Senate?

What can one expect of a state full of Red Sox fans. Maybe if the Sox actually win something, it will put them into a better frame of mind and stop the political madness?

Maybe?

[Jedi Master Carr]

Now don't bring the Red Sox into that is putting you in some dangerous territory:p. As for the Kennedys my parents love them, and most people in Massachusetts love them. They have a different view of them then you

[CMJ]

I agree Carr. Well, Doc can slam the Kennedy's all he wants. Don't lay a hand on the Red Sox nation though. >D

[Doc Milo]

For some odd reason, people love the mob -- so they have a different view of the likes of John Gotti than I do -- doesn't stop making the crooks.

The Kennedy's are just like the mob, IMO. Worse, they're crooks in government. At least with mob families, you know they are crooks.

And I'll slam the Sox all I want to! It's America, after all! (Although, I shudder to think what America would be if a Kennedy ever became President again!

[Jedi Master Carr]

First off I don't think the Kennedys are anything like the mob. The Mob are a criminal organization that has killed thousands of people. The Kennedies haven't done any of those things, they don't control gambling, prostitution, etc. To me comparing them to the likes of Capone and that is plain wrong. Second most historians think JFK was a good president and if he had lived would have been one of our better presidents. He did a great job in the Cuban Missle crisis standing up them, another president might have screwed it up and started WW 3. Namely someone like Richard Nixon. Now there was someone who was corrupt. That man was our worst presdient, at least in the 20th century. He did terrible things (Watergate comes to mind at first) and America is lucky he wasn't president during the Cuban Missle crisis he probably would have attacked cuba and started a war.

[Keerrourri Feessaarro]

The Kennedys are a criminal organization that have killed Mary Jo, and gotten away with it. Their connections to the mafia, while not conclusive, can't really be dismissed readily.

Most historians would disagree about JFK being a good president, BTW. He served a brief term with only one real success, and died before scandal could mar his name. His assassination gave him a martyr effect, and he's revered FAR more than he should be.

And I agree. Leave my damn Red Sox outta this.

[Jedi Master Carr]

The only connections to the Mafia was his father and that was because he was a bootlegger. But most doubt there was anything else there. Kennedy's only problem was being a ladies man and I don't see that as a damning thing. And who is Mary Jo?? If she is that woman who died on Chapuctic(sp) then that is nuts it wasn't like it was premidated or anything worst case it was an accident or maybe manslaughter but that is a huge maybe.

[Charley]

Ted got away scot free.

[CMJ]

Well, not exactly scott free. If it had never happened he probably would have been elected President instead of Carter in '76. :rolleyes

As far as JFK being considered a great president? Carr are you nuts?

He really isn't considered good or bad, because much like was stated, he never finished his term. He wasn't necessarily going to be re-elected in 1964. His death did elevate him to martyrdom.

That said I give Kennedy fairly high marks overall. Personally though, I don't think people should rank Presidents in the pantheon until about 50 years after they served. That lets history be the true judge of what they accomplished, rather than politics.

[ReaperFett]

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=134 - Next he'll say it was HE who created the internet! ;)

[Jedi Master Carr]

well CMJ that is my opinion, besides I called him a good president mostly because of his actions over the Cuban Missle Crisis he did a great job over that and that was why he will be remembered from preventing WW3. I think things would have went different if Nixon was president. And Reaper do you hate Kerry or something??? I agree with what Kerry said to Dean I think he did a lot of this behind the scenes. Besides he can't lead ever bill and sometimes things go better if your name is not on.

[Charley]

It matters when its over the Presidency, which is a leadership position. To qualify, its usually a good idea to be a leader of some sort, and not to make a habit of riding coattails, which is what Kerry has done, more or less.

[JediBoricua]

Anyone saw the President on Meet the Press today?

Though I must admit that the man has a certain charm that makes him very appealing, on the whole I think the interview was not a good move for him. He seemed insecure on some points, took over 5 seconds to answer tough questions and stuttered a little.

OToH he handled the AWOL question in a satisfactory matter IMO, and I believe the Dems should not push the envelope on this particular issue, I think comparing Kerry's military record with Bush's is more than enough and they should be careful not to overkill the whole thing.

Who would have thought three months ago that we would have a real race in '04, I had given up and accepted the fact that we would have another 4 years of Bush, now I'm not sure. I'ts gonna be a great race.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I agree the race will be tight, and I have been looking at some things. I think Kerry could win a southern state. Virginia is the one I am thinking of. The state has been going more democrat lately. Electating a Democratic governor and controlling both houses, maybe it is the big influx of people in Northern Virgina, I am not sure. Tennessee is also possible it has the same change, although Gore couldn't win it (unless they know something we don't). Those are the only two southern states and maybe Florida Kerry has a shot in, IMO.

[ReaperFett]

Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr
And Reaper do you hate Kerry or something???
Nah, I just paste links I find :)

[Jedieb]

The Nomination
Kerry is going to win the nomination. It's a given now. Edwards will probably hang on until Super Tuesday and then call it quits. Clark is out and he'll be endorsing Kerry. Dean... does anyone really care? He did his part by helping to energize the Democratic base. Thanks for the help, but it's time for the big boys now.

The VP Nomination
Edwards has the inside track but I think there are 2 other guys to look out for, Gephardt and Bob Graham. Bush probably can't win re-election without Florida because he's going to lose California and NY again. Choosing the popular Graham (former governor and Senator of the state) would be a risky gamble IMO. Gephardt would be a solid Midwestern strategy. Personally, I like Edwards and I wouldn't mind seeing him get the nod.

Dirty Politics (Bush went AWOL and Kerry attended a concert with Hanoi Jane!)
Liberal, conservative, Republican, or Democrat, none are safe and none are innocent when it comes to gutter politics. Four years ago the press largely ignored Bush's military record and Gore didn't push it. It looks like this election will be different. Kerry hasn't directly attacked Bush's record in the Guard. The most he's said is that Bush's service in the Guard was not that different from "going to Canada, going to jail, being a conscientious objector" as a method of avoiding going to Vietnam. As harsh as that may seem, it's pretty accurate and when it comes from a Vietnam Vet with a Silver Star, a Bronze Star, and 3 Purple Hearts, it carries some weight. The issue of Bush's service in the Guard has already caused Bush more embarrasment this time around than it did 4 years ago. It's a combination of factors. He's going up against a decorated Veteran so the issue of military service isn't going to go away. Also, there are a lot of Bush bashers out there who are still bitter about Florida and they're not going to let his Guard service slide this time. I don't think that Kerry will personally attack Bush as a deserter or call him AWOL, but there's nothing he can do to stop some of the attack dogs that are going to go after Bush.

As for me, I lean towards bashing Dubya for his war record. I wouldn't go so far as to call him a deserter, but I sure as hell don't think he should be doing much bragging about his time in the Guard. The fact is, he used family influence to jump over more qualified candidates to get into the Texas Air National Guard. Back in the Vietnam era, the Guard was much different then it is today. Today, service in the Guard can result in being activated for service abroad at any time and most people who go into the Guard are well aware of that. Back then it was a way to get out of going to Vietanm, plain and simple. Bush has also made some misleading statements about his stint in the Guard. Such as why he didn't take his annual flight physical (He said his family doctor was in Texas while he was in Alabama, but flight physical can ONLY be given by military physicians.). The failure to take that physical is what got him grounded in the first place. The records produced by the White House this week still leave much of last year in Alabama unaccounted for. There's no concrete evidence that Bush went AWOL, and I don't think it's not something I'd use against him. But bottom line, he's going to run against someone who was getting shot at in the jungle, while Dubya was drinking beer with his buddies in Alabama. Bush can't win this part of the battle.

When Kerry returned from Vietnam he spoke out against the war. Which leads us to the cheap shots made just yesterday by some members of the opposition. A photograph of a concert audience including Jane Fonda and in the background a young John Kerry made the rounds yesterday. I've heard different reports describing the event as a war protest /concert. It's pretty pathetic. So what, he attended an anti war demonstration after coming back from Nam? Thousands of Veterans did the same. I doubt this story is going to have legs. It'll fade pretty quickly.

There's enough bitterness on both sides to produce some slealzy moments this year. In the end, you'd hope the main characters stay away from the bait. Surrogates on both sides are going to wallow in the mud, I just don't want to see it between the Prez and VP candidates.

The Election
It's going to be close. Remember, Dubya is still the candidate that lost the popular vote to the charisma magnate that is Al Gore. :rolleyes If you throw in Nader's votes Bush trailed the 2 by more than 3 million votes. A Naderless election would have given Gore Florida. The Dems are praying Nader won't run again and the Republicans would probably be willing to finance Nader's campaign for him. Even if Nader doesn't run, it guarantees Kerry NOTHING. Penn. will still be up for grabs and the DNC is going to have to do some serious mobilizing in Florida to win that state. Kerry will do better in the South than people think, but I doubt he will take away any of the states that Bush won last year. It's going to come down to the Midwest and Florida.

The Economy
Will Bush be the first President since Hoover to lose jobs during his Presidency? Jobs are picking up, but they're not being created as quickly as they usually are in this stage of a recovery. The deficits created by the Administration haven't just angered Dems and liberals, but there are plenty of conservatives who aren't happy with how much money Bush has been spending.

Moderates and Independants
This is where the election is going to be won and lost. Both parties will have their bases energized. They'll more than likely cancel each other out. Where will the swing voters go? Voters who went for Bush because of Clinton fatigue may reconsider. Voters who were turned off by Gore's horrendous and rude performance during the first debate may not swing his way if Kerry avoids that mistake. Will the South reject Kerry as a Mass. liberal? Could the Governator perform a miracle and swing California Bush's way?

It's going to be close. My vote's been made up, but I'm not the one who's going to decide the election and neither will the ardent Bush supporters. It's up to the moderates.

[ReaperFett]

eb, is it a Given Kerry will win in light of the current rumblings?

[Jedieb]

Kerry's a lock. The rumblings are fairly typical for party nominations. You saw the same things with Bush and McCain in 2000. Gephardt, Liberman, and Clarkare gone. The 3 leading candidates left are Kerry, Edwards, and Dean. Dean is trailing badly in his self declared must win state of Wisconsin. He's become a bit of joke. Edwards' main claim has been, "I can win in the South." But that theory took a serious shot this past Tuesday. Kerry won convincingly in Tenn. and my home state of Virginia. Kerry's wins prompted Clark to drop out the next day and it's only a matter of time before Edwards does the same. He may get a boost from Southern Clark supporters, but it won't be enough. I think he wants to keep his profile up so he can generate enough momentum to get the VP nod. Super Tuesday, which is March 2 I believe, will be the final shakedown. I expect Edwards to bow out the very next day. Dean may carry on after that, but he's not a contender anymore. Democrats have flocked to Kerry in these primaries primarily for one reason, they believe he's the best candidate to beat Bush. It's been rather startling to see the exit polls and how much emphasis voters have placed on choosing a candidate that can unseat Dubya. The Democratic base is going to be more energized than it was in 2000. I would be surprised if November turns into a landslide for either party.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Good analysis Jedieb I agree with what you said. Another state to watch out for is Ohio, that state has lost more jobs than other state in the US it could go Kerry's way. South Carolina (my state) is the other state that has lost a lot of jobs but I don't know if Kerry can win it. He would have better luck in Florida, Virginia, and Tennessee.

[Jedieb]

It looks like the Bush camp is also convinced that Kerry is going to be the nominee. They recently sent out an e-mail to 6million voters attacking Kerry on his ties to special interest. Now, I think this is a LEGITIMATE issue to be raised during the campaign. But the Republicans are skating on this ice here because it could blow up in their face. When you've got an adminstration full of former lobbyist and former oil industry employees it's hard to act as if you're free of special interest influence. Here's a Washington Post article detailing why this could be a sticky issue for Bush.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A41097-2004Feb13.html

[Jedi Master Carr]

yeah it is like the pot calling the kettle black. Also I hate that the first add they do is attack typical of them :p

[ReaperFett]

Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr
yeah it is like the pot calling the kettle black.
Just like Kerry going silent on his "Anyone bringing up draft records are cowards" opinion. Seriously, how many kettles do you have going for presidency? ;)

[CMJ]

The democratic hopefuls(including Kerry) have been levying claims like this against Bush for sometime now. I think Rove and co. are fighting back to try to make the playing field level.

It's not the pot calling the kettle black Carr...that was Kerry doing the charge in the first place. This is the kettle saying..."Hey you're black too!"

;)

[Jedi Master Carr]

I don't think Kerry has taken any more than any other congressmen and senator. I don't have a problem with Kerry's record and actually he has taken the least amount of money from special interest for the 2004 Election and that was from CNN.

[Charley]

:lol if you say so, dude.

[ReaperFett]

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=143

[Jedi Master Carr]

Hey thats the way I feel Bush has taken more money from special interest than any politician in the modern era so that makes him the worse. Besides I like Kerry and that is the way I stand.

[Doc Milo]

In my "old age" (I just turned 35 -- it's all downhill from here!) I've come to mistrust and dislike politicians period. I don't care if they are republican, democrat, conservative, liberal, green or red (although I don't see the difference between green and red from a political standpoint!) They are all corrupt to some degree or another -- and not a single one of them really wants the best thing for the country. They want the best thing for them. In this time, it's become very important who you choose to "follow" and who we choose to lead us. And I don't see anyone who is worthy leading me anywhere.

I stand behind Truth -- unfortunately, politics and truth are antonyms. Politics is all about manipulation of truth. A "truth of perception." It's more important to a politician to have people percieve the truth in a lie than to actually tell the truth.

The Media is just as guilty at this as the politicos -- more interested in "balance" than truth. For example. Say the republicans make a proposal in the senate. The democrats have their interpretation about the proposal, stating this and that. The republicas have their interpretation saying that and this. The Media reports what both say about the proposal -- calling it balanced reporting. And the one thing missing in their report is what the proposal itself actually states. There is nothing wrong with being "biased toward the truth." Yet, we don't get that from the media. we get "balanced reporting" where we the people are only told what the two sides think about the truth, but are never told what the truth is.

This has sickened me about the state of our nation and its political class.

I've chosen to sit back and not take sides....

[Jedi Master Carr]

Well in some ways I agree with you I am very cynical as well most politician take money from special interest. I wish I had an answer to change the system, but I don't outside of some kind of dictatorship which is just really really wrong.

[Marcus Telcontar]

In my "old age" (I just turned 35 -- it's all downhill from here!) I've come to mistrust and dislike politicians period. I don't care if they are republican, democrat, conservative, liberal, green or red (although I don't see the difference between green and red from a political standpoint!) They are all corrupt to some degree or another -- and not a single one of them really wants the best thing for the country. They want the best thing for them. In this time, it's become very important who you choose to "follow" and who we choose to lead us. And I don't see anyone who is worthy leading me anywhere.

I'd call you a cynical old bastard, but..... I'm only three months younger and I'm probably more sick of politicians as well.

I sooooo want to vote out John Howard, the Aussie Prime minister aka George Bush's lap dog.

what is good tho is we have an Opposition leader who has livened things up. It's rare in this sterile and double talking age that we have someone who actually said "The Prime Ministster is an <smallfont color={hovercolor}>-Censored-</smallfont> kisser and his supporters a conga line of suckholes to USA policy"

Or words to that effect. Least it makes for good headlines. This guy broke a taxi drivers arm. and he could be our next PM.

I can only hope.He's the first politician in a long while who doesnt dabble in double speak and may have a touch of honesty. which is about bloody time.

[Doc Milo]

I wouldn't count on it.

Politicians like to use that "angle" too, in order to get elected. It's telling just enough of the truth to give themselves credibility -- and I think that is the worst kind of lie.

Someone who seems honest in this day and age, it's a good bet he's the most dishonest of all!

Now, that does sound cynical doesn't it?

[Jedi Master Carr]

It is easy to get cynical with politicians.

[Jedieb]

2 more wins for Kerry over the weekend and Wisonsin is next. There are rumblings that Dean my actually drop out after Wisconsin. I still think that Edwards may hang on until Super Tuesday. Over the weekend you could see Dean and Edwards pull back from attacking the front runner, especially in their debate. The handwriting is on the wall.

Bush's military records were released on Friday and there wasn't anything new in them. This issue isn't going anywhere really. It's just going to be a minor thorn in Bush's side and a minor shot at his "warrior" image. It'll be ignored by some but disgust others. If it doesn't bother you then you don't even want to read this article by Jimmy Breslin. If you want to see how badly the Guard issue rankles some then check it out.
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/politics/ny-nybres143670574feb15,0,6023710.column?coll=ny-lipolitics-print

[ReaperFett]

I think Dean will stick in until the end, just incase Kerry goes under.

[Jedieb]

Even Dean's own people see the writing on the wall. I just hope that Dean is just putting on a pre-Wisconsin brave face. He's got to realize it's over and bow out if he doesn't pull a Wisconsin miracle.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/02/16/elec04.prez.main/index.html

[Figrin D'an]

Dean might get a slightly better showing in Wisconsin than he has in previous states, but Kerry will still win the state. He's got a sizable lead, and I doubt that will change in 24 hours. The debate on Sunday was pretty much a stalemate, effectively meaning that Kerry was the winner and should hold his lead.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I think Dean is done. With Grossman leaving his campaign his doomed. I can't see how he can keep going he has no money left to compete in the big states. Sure he could be like Sharpton and Kuckein (I am looking for a wife guy) but they have no hope anyway. Edwards could stick in but I don't see him doing well on Super Tuesday.

[CMJ]

Early on....looks like Edwards might not be dead afterall.

[Jedieb]

It's going to be a close finish between Edwards and Kerry tonight. Dean is finishing a distant third and if there was ever any doubt that his campaign is done it ended tonight. With his strong showing Edwards may have elevated himself to the obvious choice for the Dem VP spot. Even with a win he won't stop Kerry. Over 40% of the voters in tonight's Wisconsin primary were independents. Most states don't allow independant voters and that holds true for the states on Super Tuesday and those few before. It looks like Kerry picked up more than 50% of the Democratic votes tonight so his lead there is still strong.

Edwards just made the rounds on Larry King and Hardball. This guy is probably the smoothest speaker among Kerry, Bush, and Chaney. Friggin' lawyers. ;)

[CMJ]

You need to get independents to win. This is kind of reminding me of the GOP in 2000. McCain was the guy that won over the independents- and probably would've blown out Gore....if the party had been smart enough to nominate him.

I still say that's what would happen if the Dems closed ranks around Edwards. Instead they're gonna choose Kerry, and we're going to have a '00 type of election.

[Jedieb]

I don't think Kerry has taken any more than any other congressmen and senator. I don't have a problem with Kerry's record and actually he has taken the least amount of money from special interest for the 2004 Election and that was from CNN.

I think this is the CNN info Carr was referring to. Check the stats out and you see that Bush's numbers dwarf all the other candidates. You might even be surprised to see that Edwards has gotten more money than Kerry.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/special/president/fec/index.html

If you go down to the pictures of the individual candidates and click on their pictures you can find a link that leads you to a side by side comparison of where their career donations have come. Edwards got over $900K from what I assume to be law firm. That was the single biggest contributor to any candidate that I saw. Bush has that big embarrasing $600K price tag from Enron that I'm surprised more people don't pay attention to. Kerry comes in 3rd of the 3 with only one interest donating more than 200K. Bush is clearly ahead of all the candidates. It's not even close. And these numbers represent their CAREERS. Kerry comes in 3rd, and he's had the longest political career of these 3 candidates. Again, I don't think this is an issue that favors Bush at all.

[Jedieb]

You need to get independents to win. This is kind of reminding me of the GOP in 2000. McCain was the guy that won over the independents- and probably would've blown out Gore....if the party had been smart enough to nominate him.
McCain would have crushed Gore. Hell, he would have even gotten my vote. But Kerry has done well among independents in other primaries. This is the first one in which Edwards has won so convincingly amongst Independents. There were probably a few Republicans who wanted to throw some dirt on Kerry tonight by voting for Edwards, but nevertheless, it's a big night for Edwards. I think he's gone a long way towards wrapping up the VP spot on the ticket. He's going to get a lot of exposure from his showing tonight and it's all going to be good. But watch him carefully, he will NOT attack Kerry directly. He'll stick to his positive message and take shots at Bush. Deep down, he knows he's playing for second and he's doing a good job of it.

[Jedieb]

NBC just called Wisconsin for Kerry. So even with Edwards' strong showing, it's still 15 out of 17 for Kerry.

[CMJ]

I guess Kerry will probably win, but how can they call it? The last raw numbers I saw had maybe 400 votes seperating the two...

[Jedi Master Carr]

Well now it is almost 20k seperating the two. So I say it looks like he will win. I think it must be because the more democratic counties were still to come in which would have been more favorable to Kerry in NBC and CNN's mind. Also I heard that NAFTA played a role in this, but I don't see NAFTA mattering much on Super Tuesday except maybe in Ohio which has lost a lot of jobs. Edwards could be the VP candidate I think it is between him, Gephardt and Clark at the moment.

[Jedieb]

Just days ago Kerry led Edwards by 35 points in some polls. Edwards made a remarkable surge to close within 5 points. This morning Edwards got the best possible news for his campaign, Dean is suspending his campaign. He's going to keep his name on the ballots but he's not actively running. Now Edwards has a shot at Dean's supporters and a 2 man race is really his only hope. Dean's withdrawal and yesterday's strong showing give Edwards something to fight for leading into Super Tuesday. Edwards is in New York today fund raising and he'll be using his second place Wisconsin finish to help raise funds.

Even if this were to result in a stunning reversal of fortunes and propel Edwards to the top, I think this is a good thing for the Democrats. It extends the race and gives them more free press. Edwards can run a race without being overtly negative of Kerry. It'll be interesting to see how Kerry responds to a this challenge. He's a tough campaigner, but nominations are tricky. You want to play hardball (witness last night's cutting off of Edwards' speech by Kerry) but you don't want to sling mud and cannibalize each other the way Gephardt and Dean did early on.

One thing is for sure, no one wants to share a stage with Edwards very often. He is by far the best speaking candidate we've had on this big a stage since Clinton, and before that Reagan.

[CMJ]

Honestly, I think he's a better speaker than Clinton ever was. I was a bit young and don't really remember how good Reagan was(I do remember his presidency kinda well, but I wasn't into politics so much back then). He left office in January of '89 - I was 10.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Still Edwards has a problem, money. His people have basically said he is only going to Campaign in upstate NY, Ohio and Georgia. That means he is giving Kerry California (a whopping 360 delgates) I don't think he can win NY since most of the population is around New York City and would probably vote for Kerry. Sure he will probably win Georgia but if that is all he can win he is defintely finished. Even if he finishes closes in some states that doesn't matter any more. It be almost impossible for him to come back really in my opinon. Nobody has ever lost when they had this kind of lead. I can only think Munskie(sp) but he won the first two primaries and lost just about every one after that.

[CMJ]

The democratic party awards delegates on a proportinal basis. As long as Edwards is close in most of the states in 2 weeks, Kerry won't end the race. The following week 4 more southern states have primaries. If Edwards makes it through Super Tuesday, he may make noise there.

[Brian]

Well, Dean's campaign operations are halted. Looks like he's done.

Too bad. I got a chuckle out of my avatar.

[JediBoricua]

After yesterday's showing Edwards bought himself a ticket till Super Tuesday.

It's interesting when you analize the exit polls (that's how networks can predict who will win before the official results are in), Edwards had a strong showing partly because he had the support of independents and some republicans wanting to cause mischief in the Dem primary.

Only a handful of states in the next few weeks allow non-democrats on the primaries, so if Edwards keeps getting beaten by double digits in those states where only democrats can vote, the race should be over by Super Tuesday.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Yeah but Kerry should win over 800 delgates (by winning NY, the New England States, and California) and he should win Minnesota since Edwards won't campaign there. That leaves Edwards winning Georgia and coming a close second in Ohio that will doom him regardless of the southern states.

[CMJ]

I *said* if he (Edwards) can keep most of those states close then Kerry won't rack up many more delegates because it's done on a proportinal basis. Let's so the races are as close as Wisconson...Kerry will get more delegates,but not THAT many more.Allowing Edwards to stay in the game.

Granted if he gets blown out in most of the states, then it's over. We shall see.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I think Kerry really got a huge endorsement today.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040219/ts_nm/campaign_kerry_dc&cid=564&ncid=2043

The backing of the AFI-CIO is huge and should help Kerry especially in Ohio.

[Arahisie Silentwrath]

Originally posted by Doc Milo
In my "old age" (I just turned 35 -- it's all downhill from here!) I've come to mistrust and dislike politicians period. I don't care if they are republican, democrat, conservative, liberal, green or red (although I don't see the difference between green and red from a political standpoint!) They are all corrupt to some degree or another -- and not a single one of them really wants the best thing for the country. They want the best thing for them. In this time, it's become very important who you choose to "follow" and who we choose to lead us. And I don't see anyone who is worthy leading me anywhere.

I stand behind Truth -- unfortunately, politics and truth are antonyms. Politics is all about manipulation of truth. A "truth of perception." It's more important to a politician to have people percieve the truth in a lie than to actually tell the truth.

The Media is just as guilty at this as the politicos -- more interested in "balance" than truth. For example. Say the republicans make a proposal in the senate. The democrats have their interpretation about the proposal, stating this and that. The republicas have their interpretation saying that and this. The Media reports what both say about the proposal -- calling it balanced reporting. And the one thing missing in their report is what the proposal itself actually states. There is nothing wrong with being "biased toward the truth." Yet, we don't get that from the media. we get "balanced reporting" where we the people are only told what the two sides think about the truth, but are never told what the truth is.

This has sickened me about the state of our nation and its political class.

I've chosen to sit back and not take sides....

*cheers!!!*

[Jedieb]

7 of the states on Super Tuesday will allow independents to vote in their primaries. So this really is Edwards's only chance to make a dent into Kerry's lead. Kerry has beaten Edwards amongst independents in other states so Edwards doesn't have them all to himself. At the end of the day, he's still 1-16 to Kerry's 15-2. Edwards just doesn't have to win some primaries, he has to win them big so he can get a big enough proportion of delegates to catch Kerry. It's a long shot, but an extended race is good for the Democrats. The coverage is free publicity.

[Jedi Master Carr]

How many of those states are in NE? I bet Vermont is one and he isn't on the ballot. And he won't do well at all in Mass, R.I or Conn. I can't see him doing well in NY either or California. His only chances are Ohio, Georgia and Maryland IMO.

[Jedieb]

Tomorrow morning Nader will announce his 04 Presidential plans. You can skip the show if you want. Just step outside. If you see anyone dancing in the street just ask them what party they're from. If they're Republicans then that means Nader's running. If they're Democrats then Vader's deluded himself into running again. Way to go Ralph!

[Doc Milo]

Nadar's running. You don't go on TV to announce that you're not running and thus have nothing to say. Take it to the bank. He's running.

[Brian]

Originally posted by Jedieb
If they're Democrats then Vader's deluded himself into running again.

Darth Vader himself, running for president? I don't see how he could lose, not with the backing of the entire Empire behind him. ;)

[CMJ]

Originally posted by Doc Milo
Nadar's running. You don't go on TV to announce that you're not running and thus have nothing to say. Take it to the bank. He's running.

I could be mistaken, but I believe that's exactly what Al Gore did on 60 Minutes. ;)

[Doc Milo]

Well, Al Gore usually has nothing to say, and says it in the most boring 45 minutes of stiff speech you'll ever want to hear. :D

[CMJ]

I'm just saying...the precendent has been set. ;)

Honestly, I don't think Nader will get half the votes he got in '00 if he runs. Nonethless, this should a terribly close election.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Nader will be an independent too, so he wont' be able to get on the same numbers of states that he did in the Green Party. Also there are some democrats who voted for him last time who are against him this time. I saw that on CNN.

[Jedieb]

"After careful thought and my desire to retire our supremely selected president, I've decided to run as an independent candidate for president," Ralph Vader

LIAR! Let me see, I want to "retire" him, so I'll run and once again siphon votes from the legitimate candidate that has a chance to defeat him. Way to go Lord of the SITH!

He won't get as many votes as he did last time. Make no mistakes, he will cost Kerry some votes, but his numbers will be closer to Buchanan's 2000 numbers. What he will do is tarnish his image amongst liberals and progressives, especially those bent on getting Bush out of office. Way to put ego in front of cause Vader.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Yeah I think he will hurt himself more than anything else. I think the Green Party will even hate him now, along with some group he started (can't think of its name off hand) but I heard on CNN they were going to take his name of their letterhead if he ran.

[Jedieb]

http://www.buzzflash.com/burns/04/02/images/23oped_darth_nader.gif

The man is EVIL!!!

[Jedi Master Carr]

I found this good article on Kerry it is a very good piece shows what kind of man he is and what he has done in the Senate.

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040315&s=corn

[Jedieb]

Kerry is ahead in the polls in all 10 Super Tuesday states. Edwards' only chance to to close the gap in Georgia and Ohio. If he goes 0-10 then it'll be over. Which is a shame because the race and the free press coverage are a boost for the DNC. Even if Edwards pulls out 2 or 3 wins the math is going to be difficult for him but stranger things have happened. Personally, I think Edwards has given up. That's why you see him attacking Bush and trying to stay as positive as possible when he shares a stage with Kerry. He's angling for the VP spot and the only persons I see standing in his way are Graham and Gephardt.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I think Clark has a small chance if the rumors are true that Bill Clinton is trying to get Clark as the VP.

[Jedieb]

I like Clark, I even did some local work on his campaign. But I don't think he's polished enough a politician to help the ticket. I think both Edwards or Graham would be better choices. I'd love to see Clark as Sec. of State or Defense though.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I think he work better there too. Not sure where these rumors of Clinton trying to push Clark of course they come from the NY Post so they are probably full of crap.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Its all but over. It looks like Kerry is going to win 9 of the 10 states. He didn't win Vermont which goes to Dean. There is talk now Edwards will quit tomorrow and just about seals the nomination for Kerry.

[ReaperFett]

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/cx/uc/20040224/tt/tt040224.gif

[ReaperFett]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/03/opinion/03GIL.html


You can't get rid of him, he's like the Terminator! :)

[CMJ]

AP Poll Finds Bush, Kerry Tied in Race

By WILL LESTER, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - In the first poll since John Kerry (news - web sites) locked up the Democratic nomination, Kerry and President Bush (news - web sites) are tied while independent Ralph Nader (news - web sites) has captured enough support to affect the outcome, validating Democrats' fears.

The Republican incumbent had the backing of 46 percent, Kerry 45 percent and Nader, the 2000 Green Party candidate who entered the race last month, was at 6 percent in the survey conducted for The Associated Press by Ipsos-Public Affairs.

Bush and the four-term Massachusetts senator, who emerged as the nominee Tuesday after a string of primary race wins over several rivals, have been running close or Kerry has been ahead in most recent polls that did not include Nader.

Since Nader entered the race Feb. 22, campaign strategists and political analysts have been trying to assess the impact of another presidential bid by the consumer activist whom Democrats blame for Al Gore (news - web sites)'s loss in 2000.

Four years ago, Nader appeared on the ballot in 43 states and Washington, D.C., garnering only 2.7 percent of the vote. But in Florida and New Hampshire, Bush won such narrow victories that had Gore received the bulk of Nader's votes in those states, he would have won the general election.

Exit polls from 2000 show that about half of Nader's voters would have backed Gore in a two-way race. Nader dismisses the spoiler label.

While Nader's support in the AP-Ipsos poll was 6 percent, his backing in polls in 2000 fluctuated in the single digits — often at about 4 percent, but sometimes higher. This year, Nader is unlikely to get the Green Party nod and faces a stiff challenge in getting his name on the ballot in 50 states.

Kenneth Freeman, an 86-year-old retiree from New Smyrna Beach, Fla., who leans Democratic, was clearly unhappy with Nader's presidential bid.

"Ralph Nader is fouling it all up," Freeman said. "He's taking votes away from the Democrats. I think he's on an ego trip."

Bush's job approval in the AP-Ipsos poll was 48 percent, with 49 percent disapproving, which is essentially the same as last month when 47 percent approved of the president's job performance.

His approval rating, which soared close to 90 percent after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and remained high for months, has dipped to the lowest levels of his presidency in recent weeks.

Six in 10 said the country is on the wrong track, up from last month, while slightly more than a third of those surveyed — 35 percent — said the country is headed in the right direction.

"We're 240-something days from Election Day. We've got a long way to go and expect it to be a close race throughout, no matter what the factors are," said Terry Holt, a spokesman for the Bush campaign.

The poll was conducted Monday through Wednesday as Kerry captured nine of 10 Super Tuesday elections and claimed the nomination. Nightly results suggested that Kerry did not get a bounce from winning the nomination.

"For all those who want to bring change to America, we need to remain united behind the Democratic nominee," said Kerry campaign spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter.

Kerry, who had solid backing from 28 percent of the voters, was running strong among minorities, people with low incomes, single people, older voters and Catholics.

Bush, who had solid backing from 37 percent, performed well among whites, men, Protestants, homeowners and suburban dwellers.

"I'm worried about the Democrats taking control," said Stephanie Rahaniotis, a Republican from Lynbrook, N.Y. She said after the Sept. 11 attacks, she feels safer with Bush in charge and thinks Democrats will "divert our attention from the military."

In the poll, Nader was most likely to get the backing of young adults, independents and maybe a GOP voter.

Republican Virgil Ahlberg of Apison, Tenn., said he is seriously considering a vote for Nader.

"Bush has come across as a little more aggressive and warlike than I like," he said. "I like Ralph Nader being in the race. I like his practicality and taking people to task for things they promise to do, things that aren't being addressed."

The AP-Ipsos poll of 771 registered voters was taken March 1-3 and had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

___

[Doc Milo]

While I'm not Kerry supporter, I'd not be worried just yet. Polls taken now are apt to be skewed based upon who is in the news etc... Kerry's numbers before this could have been higher based on the fact that the primaries were the "big news." They can be lower in this poll based upon Nader's recent announcement.

Too many variables for any poll taken now to be accurate....

[Jedi Master Carr]

The polls don't matter at this point. But it looks like it will be a close election regardless.

[CMJ]

I just thought it was an interesting story. Especially with Nader's strong support.

[Jedieb]

Nader made a big splash (yes, 6% is a big splash for Nader) in CMJ's poll and you saw how it drew Kerry back to Bush. A poll last week had Kerry with a double digit lead over a head to head match up with Bush. The time to worry about low poll results are when you don't get bounces when you should. Bush is sure to take a hit this week because of today's job report. Economists had predicted around 120,000 new jobs for Feb. and the numbers released today put it at 21,000. To make matters worse, most of the jobs created were GOVERNMENT jobs. Not exactly the kind of jobs many conservatives want created. For the 43rd consecutive month the country loss manufacturing jobs as well. So, I'd expect Kerry to get a point or two out of that news in next week's polls.

The conventions are where you'll see polls swing back and forth. Each candidate should get a big boost from their own convention. I don't which one is on first. I'd rather have the last convention, but then you run the risk of letting your opponent define you and bury you. The Dems are in Boston and the Reps in NY. Let the games begin!

[Jedieb]

DNC Convention - July 26-29
RNC Convention - Aug. 30 to Sept. 2

[CMJ]

The party in power always has the last convention.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I wonder how the Republicans got NY that is a democrat town? Usually they chose Houston I guess they got tired of it:p

[CMJ]

There is no *usual* town. The GOP held the '96 convention in San Diego.I honestly don't remember where they held the '92 one, but I'm nearly positive it wasn't in Houston. In '88 the convention was in New Orleans.

:p

[Jedi Master Carr]

LOL just seems like they go to Houston a lot maybe its all the jokes the late nighters make on it heh.

[Jedieb]

They chose the Dem stronghold of NY for one reason, 9-11. But if Bush gives his acceptance speech anywhere near ground zero it'll cause even more controversy than his first round of ads with 9-11 images. Keep it indoors boys.

[Jedi Master Carr]

He be smart to keep it indoors plus most new Yorkers don't like him already of course the republicans have probably already conceded NY.

[ReaperFett]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/040228/ids_photos_ts/r1633574988.jpg

That photo is priceless. Every other one? A great shot. That one? Ouch :lol