Dow below 10000, Bush is Toast

[ChristinaB]

The market is crashing

Bush approval rating hits lowest point (http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/polls/2004-05-10-bush-poll_x.htm)

His feet are stuck in Iraqi Sh**

Mail it in, Kerry is our next President

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Mail it in, Kerry is our next President

Not if my vote matters. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[B-Man]

[ QUOTE ]
Mail it in, Kerry is our next President

[/ QUOTE ]

The race is going to go back and forth and stay close until election day. The electoral vote will probably be almost as close as 2000, but I think in the end Bush will prevail, because Kerry is a ridiculously weak candidate. He's probably the weakest candidate I have ever seen from a major party (including Dukakis and Mondale). He also has one of the worst records of flip-flopping on issues; many politicians do it, but Kerry seems to have done it on almost every issue. He's about as fake as they come, and in the end he wont be able to sell the American people because he is not in Bill Clinton's league when it comes to slickness.

[elwoodblues]

Let's face it, there have been a lot of terribly week candidates in recent history (Kerry included).

My list:
Bush (as a candidate I thought he was terribly weak...he has shown strength as a president even though I disagree with how he is directing that strength)

Dole - just awful (I would say he's the weakest in recent history)

Dukakis - terrible (worst Dem candidate)

[adios]

By an objective measure such as electoral votes, Mondale was far weaker than Dukakis. Dukakis received 111 electoral votes and Mondale received 13. Mondale's pledge to raise taxes across the board did him in IMO. That's why Kerry has only pledged tax hikes on the "rich" i.e. those households making collectively over $200,000+ a year.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
The market is crashing

[/ QUOTE ]

The market has declined because Kerry's election chances have risen /images/graemlins/smile.gif.

[andyfox]

2000: Gore 61%, Bush 32% in Rhode Island.

Because of the winner take all system, your vote doesn't count.

[GWB]

[ QUOTE ]
2000: Gore 61%, Bush 32% in Rhode Island.



[/ QUOTE ]
Rhode Island is going to fall into the sea someday. /images/graemlins/grin.gif (or was that California?)

[GWB]

[ QUOTE ]
Bush approval rating hits lowest point

[/ QUOTE ]

From the Gallup Poll:

George W. Bush's Job Approval Rating
October 2003 -- Present
http://media.gallup.com/POLL/Releases/pr040511i.gif


Approval numbers go up and down all the time.

[Clarkmeister]

Bush is still sitting steady at -149 to win the election. It hasn't moved more than a few pennies either way for about 2 months now. I ignore the polls, the betting line is a far better indicator.

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
Let's face it, there have been a lot of terribly week candidates in recent history (Kerry included).

My list:
Bush (as a candidate I thought he was terribly weak...he has shown strength as a president even though I disagree with how he is directing that strength)


[/ QUOTE ]

While I agree that "W" belongs on the all-time weak candidate list, I am surprised that no one has mentioned Al Gore. Given how weak Bush was as a candidate, what does that make the guy he beat. (Let's not rehash the vote counts. If you have a bad beat, you still don't get the pot.)

Gore started out as the favorite. Big Slick's morals, or lack thereof, aside, the country was sitting pretty during the Clinton-Gore administration. Just a couple little wars that no one cared about, and a fat and happy economy. Gore blew it.

Kerry has taken every position on the political spectrum. Gore could never take a single position. He tried so hard not to offend anyone that he ended up never saying anything definite.

When Ralph Nader got in the race, reporters asked him if his running would hurt Gore, and wouldn't he rather see Gore winn than Bush. His response was, if Gore can't beat Bush with or without me in the race, what good is he? Nader was right.

[elwoodblues]

You're absolutely right. I actually forgot about him (I guess that says something about the strength of his candidacy). My personal belief is that much of the vote for Bush was an anti-Clinton vote. I think that will change this time around and he'll be judged more on his own laurels than his opponents weakness. Similarly I think a lot of the current Kerry support is just an anti-Bush support --- I know mine is.

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
You're absolutely right. I actually forgot about him (I guess that says something about the strength of his candidacy).

[/ QUOTE ]

Forgot about who?? /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[ QUOTE ]
My personal belief is that much of the vote for Bush was an anti-Clinton vote.... Similarly I think a lot of the current Kerry support is just an anti-Bush support --- I know mine is.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are a lot of political commentators who believe that a presidential election is for the most part a referendum on the incumbent candidate/administration. I think that this is true.

Bush the First got elected because people were voting yes on the Reagan administration. Big Slick got in because they were voting no on the Bush the First admin. I think that the anti-Clinton vote could have been overcome if the Dems had run a human being instead of a bot. Kerry is a place holder (i.e., a zero), and will win or lose based on public opinion of Bush in late October. I think that the economy is a non-issue. Iraq will make or break him, and right now I figure he's the underdog. I don't think I could bring myself to vote for either of them. Think I'll sit out a few hands, many go shoot some craps.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

It counts marginally more than when I lived in Massachusetts /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[Nepa]

Yes, #'s do go up and down BUT below 50 percent is a serious sign of serious weakness.

I believe the last 2 under 50 percent this late are:
Ford
and
Carter
Not sure what Bush I rating was. I do know the Bush I was over 90 percent at one point and lost it because of the economy. The Family Value's plea didn't help either

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

What's funny about the 2000 election is that Gore did not want Clinton campaigning for him because he wanted to distance himself from Clinton's scandals, yet most pundits said that had Clinton been able to run again, he'd have won easily.

Yeah, Gore definitely blew it. All Clinton had to do was deliver Arkansas.

[elwoodblues]

Gore got stuck with all of the baggage and none of the charm.

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, Gore definitely blew it. All Clinton had to do was deliver Arkansas.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or Gore deliver Tennessee. Wait a minute! Gore's from TN!! /images/graemlins/blush.gif If he can't deliver his own state, what good is he?

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
Gore got stuck with all of the baggage and none of the charm.

[/ QUOTE ]

<font color="red"> NOTICE OF VIOLATION </font>

The use of the words "Gore" and "charm" in the same sentence is strictly prohibited. Thank you.

--The Language Police

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Gore's from TN!!

Gore's as much from Tennessee as I am. He was raised in DC, educated in DC, and spent 2 weeks every summer visiting relatives in Tennessee.

Well, OK, he's more from Tennessee than I am, but not by much.