Bush Opens a Double-Digit Lead!

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-05-2004
Bush Opens a Double-Digit Lead!
221
Fri, 09-03-2004 - 3:46pm
New York: For the first time since the Presidential race became a two person contest last spring, there is a clear leader, the latest TIME poll shows. If the 2004 election for President were held today, 52% of likely voters surveyed would vote for President George W. Bush, 41% would vote for Democratic nominee John Kerry, and 3% would vote for Ralph Nader, according to a new TIME poll conducted from Aug. 31 to Sept. 2. Poll results are available on TIME.com and will appear in the upcoming issue of TIME magazine, on newsstands Monday, Sept. 6.


http://www.time.com/time/press_releases/article/0,8599,692562,00.html


Edited 9/3/2004 4:13 pm ET ET by iminnie833

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-20-2003
Fri, 09-03-2004 - 6:44pm
>and that their candidate keeps running back to the one issue that he keeps trying to run from.....Vietnam<

running back to something he's running from???

I mulled that illogical statement in my head for awhile...

then eureka!

Ha ha I get it debate guy.

That was sarcasm.

Kerry who volunteered for two tours of duty, is running from Vietnam, in a race against

George Bush (served stateside during Vietnam)

quote: "I was not prepared to shoot my eardrum out with a shotgun in order to get a deferment. Nor was I willing to go to Canada. So I chose to better myself by learning how to fly airplanes."

and Dick Cheney (5 deferments from military service)

quote: "I had other priorities in the '60s than military service."

Funny stuff.

Regarding the poll

Most leader's experience a bounce after their convention.

Kerry did.

It appears Bush did as well.

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-05-2003
Fri, 09-03-2004 - 6:59pm
See, I think Edwards may have had a better shot than Kerry (I voted for him in the primary for that reason).
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Fri, 09-03-2004 - 7:07pm
Sorry. I have a need to rhyme at times. What I'm saying is I'm sad that so many Americans bought into the smiley-faced distrotions which permeated the RNC. Some of the speeches even made ME feel good. But that doesn't mean I approve of torture, suspension of habeus corpus, ignoring basic principles of economics, or the wholesale handing over of government policy to corporate interest. I came out of the RNC liking Laura Bush alot, I thought Giuliani's stories were both poignant and funny, I'm sure glad that unlike Arnold S. I didn't grow up in a half-soviet country, and I even think George W. worked real hard and delivered a speech just like a real president should...but I'm not voting for him.

And lest we forget...their balloons fell on cue. A sure sign of superior policy.

As long as I'm on a rant... did anyone else think the President's David Copperfield-like entrance onto the stage was just bizarre? Those two flag thingees passed across the stage, and then - PRESTO - there was the Prez. It reminded me of the Donny and Marie show. (I'm dating myself here.)

And I think maybe the Republicans should stop slamming Hollywood long enough to hire some good directors and editors for their film projects. The Reagan tribute was downright creepy in the number of times it showed his casket, and Nancy weeping uncontrollably. Usually when you pay tribute to someone's life, you show them...well...alive. The whole point of this film seemed be to reinforce the fact that he was dead. Quite dead. Really dead. It was disturbing. Maybe they want to scare any wayward Reagan conservatives into thinking that with the Gipper gone they'd better saddle up with Bush as the only other game in town? I really didn't get it.

And then there was Bushenheight 9/11...the film narrated by the Law and Order guy last night. Did it remind anyone else of the film Big Fish? Unfortuantely that unintended association just undermined its message as tall tales told by a Texan. The psuedo-3D was very annoying (and SOOO Robert Blake...again....not an association they're looking for). But the absolute weirdest part.....the part that made my hair stand on end...was when they showed a sweet old gray haired lady who G.W. met, in NYC on his 9/11 trip. The voice over intones "she had just lost her son...." but the picture cuts to her standing with G.W. just beaming. Grinning from ear to ear. Yuckin' it up with the prez. What the he!!? Who edited this? When you say someone just lost their son, shouldn't you show them at least sort of grieving? Or is the message here that G.W. is such a wonderfull, downhome, man of the people that his mere presense makes mothers forget their dead sons, not yet cold in the ground? I know I'm going a bit over the top here....but it was one of the worst edits I've ever seen, and I'm an editor.

The other strange thing I noticed, as I was flipping around the channels, was that Fox was the only network that didn't stop running their ticker during the President's speech. I was quite frankly shocked, since it had the effect of juxtaposing news about Palestinian bombings with the President's message of winning the war on terrror. Was it an oversight? Was it planned? I can't explain it.

I would also like to know if during the Democratic Convention, Hannity was relegated to the rafters while Colms had a prime, flag-draped spot near the floor, as the opposite of this scenario was the case at the RNC. Colmes, quite literally, seemed like he was about to get a nosebleed as he gamely tossed the interview over to Hannity, who, surprisingly, was seated right next to the guy Colmes was interviewing, I assumed, in another building. What gives?

Overall, very, very weird TV.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-05-2004
Fri, 09-03-2004 - 9:55pm
Do you get involved with these polls on their websites? If so then not everybody vote's in these polls. Not everybody has the internet and/or wants the internet who votes. I personally don't go by polls unless it's like out on the street or something like that to where anybody and everybody can voice their opinion. I make my opinion by what I read, interviews, etc. Still doing that myself. XOXO.
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Sat, 09-04-2004 - 12:48am

During ordinary times, who knows how far Edwards's charisma could hav carried him, but this is a wartime election.


Renee ~~~

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-18-2004
Sat, 09-04-2004 - 2:44am

Hey Blueishxx!


How ya been?

Miffy - Co-CL For The Politics Today Board

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-20-2003
Sat, 09-04-2004 - 3:04am
Hi mifskie.

Thanks for the welcome back.

I appoligize. I mispoke.

Kerry enlisted and served two tours.

I have no information he volunteered for any specific duty on his first tour.

It appears he was assigned to the USS Gridley based on the service records I've seen.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-18-2004
Sat, 09-04-2004 - 4:56am
Thanks, blueishxx!

Miffy - Co-CL For The Politics Today Board

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-13-2003
Sat, 09-04-2004 - 7:19am
Kerry cannot win by running on hate. There simply aren't enough Americans who despise their country enough to put a treasonous deserter in office. Wait, we elected Clinton twice... Let's not get overconfident. Kerry's self-destruction only means one thing -- clearing the Democrat playing field for Hitlery in '08.

Let's be careful, folks. The clueless Kerry supporters are going to get even more nasty in the remaining time until Nov. 2. After we win, the Associated Press will mute its attacks on America just a bit.

Thank God for GW Bush. Any Democrat would have surrendered by now.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Sat, 09-04-2004 - 9:24am
Look, this whole things going to get nasty in the next two months, but it's not the Kerry campaign that's leading it there.

There's no point in debating anything in the rest of your post because it's just nonsense. Except I will say this....if Bush wins a second term I think you can expect to see the press get tougher on him. He's slowly coming down off of the free-ride they granted him after 9/11. I know that probably sounds like some kind of crazy talk to you, but it's true. Everyone cites intelligence failures leading us astray on the WMD issue, but the press failed as well. It's their job to facilitate the public debate, and we went to war with a squelched, marginalized, timid debate because the Republicans did such a masterfull job of branding people with even the mildest doubt about the war as unpatriotic.

Pages