Kerry beating Bush in polls

A CBS poll out today puts Kerry beating Bush by 8 points:

Kerry 49
Bush 41


If you add McCain to the Kerry ticket, the margin of victory is 14 points:

Kerry-McCain 53
Bush-Cheney 39

Kerry is beating Bush in 17 of the 20 of the battleground states. Originally, 12 states were considered to be toss-ups but as the year has progressed, Bush's support in traditional Republican states has slipped. Now states like Louisiana, once considered by pundits and the campaigns to be Bush territory, are now battlegrounds. After devoting $25 million in positive ads in these 20 states, Kerry's favorability ratings are higher than Bush's. Kerry also polls higher than Bush there on the question of leadership -- this is obviously a major theme of the Bush campaign.

In traditional Democratic states, Kerry is beating Bush by double digits. For example, California's margin is 20 points.

As we head into June, the bottom line is the base is secure and growing for Kerry.

---

Updated On: 5/27/04 at 03:44 PM

You're almost right, Papa. I remember George HW Bush being at 90 percent approval ratings in early 1991 before he crashed and burned. But in this case, the polls also show movement of independents toward Kerry. This must be very disconcerting news for your friends in the White House.

---

Agree completely! I was just amplifying your point that polls are meaningless in determining an outcome 5 months from now.

Still, they are significant in nudging a campaign or a candidate in one direction or another now. It will be interesting to see how each guy positions himself in June given these numbers.

---

Polls are one thing.. now he just needs to win in the election!

oh trust me, zola, i know darn well that these idiots would happily fiddle while rome burned (that was not an empire joke, i swear). like you said before, it's 5 months away. which will give us plenty of time for "he said, he said" and a few "man on dog" moments from santorum.

the thing that gives me a lot more hope is that the gop 527's are not even online yet. once those floodgates open it's gonna be all kerry all the time ad-wise in the battleground states. and everybody knows we've got deeper pockets.

i take heart in the idea that deep down, our loonies are a smidge more rational than your loonies. just a smidge, mind you. but with a true anti-war candidate in the mix like ralphie boy, you're still gonna have the true believers who run that route. more than you think because kerry has an amazing ability to turn people off and turn on people (not turn them on, but whirl like a dervish to strike).

---

hee hee hee, zola. i agree with most of my friends on nearly everything but who to vote for and why.

i really think that people are over-estimating the osama factor. they'd have to whip him out in the last 2 weeks, i think, otherwise his novelty would get played out with 24 hour news cycles and the strength of the punditocracy.

the economy probably will be completely turned around by the fall, but that doesn't mean a thing as perception is more imporant than reality when it come to the economy. the economy had in fact turned around for his dad in '92, but that didn't do daddy much good.

watching kerry's speech tonight though i thought that he's not saying he'd do anything different, just that he'd do it better. plus he put a big ol' pricetag on getting nato involved which was already almost a foregone conclusion. gw might still blow that, but if he does succeed, then he kicked out one of the legs of kerry's master plan from today. i think that strategy is as risky as it is cautious. by not staking out his own positions he leaves himself open as gw1 did for the opponent to swoop in and steal all his positions. national elections are not won by the guy standing there yelling defiantly, "oh yeah, well that was my idea, dammit!"

jfk2 has a flaw that a lot of politicians have: when he supports something it's the single greatest idea, policy or invention in the history of mankind. the only problem is, that johnny boy changes his mind more than mrs mambo picking an outfit which leaves him with this record of statements that are clearly and diametrically opposed to his current views. which in and of itself is not a big problem as he is a politician, but he tends to insist that instead of having changed his mind that those earlier statements simply do not exist. or his pals do it for him while he blames overstatements on his pesky speechwriters.

but he is a killer finisher and that does scare the living ****e outta me.

---

"them thar gays singin' and dancin' onstage"

well, isn't that quaint? why don't ya just come out and call me a homophobic redneck, there, bway? that is what you mean isn't it? let's not dance around and make veiled comments, come out and say what you mean.

i do support bush and will be voting for him as i have said time and again on this board and have qualified my support and explained it over and over. the opinions are there for anyone who wants to spend a little time doing research rather than resorting to childish attempts to demonize. tolerance is a two way street.

---

Updated On: 5/28/04 at 10:47 AM

"quite honestly, it makes me question what you really think of 'them thar gays singin' and dancin' onstage.'"

please explain to me what this statement means then if it does not accuse me of intolerance and also suggest a questionable educational if not linguistic background? not only does it do all of that, but by the use of the quotations it also suggests that the comment in quotations is one that i have made before.

---

Updated On: 5/28/04 at 10:54 AM

not that i like anyone standing up for me, but you get a big sloppy wet kiss for that, auggie.

---

I always find these discussions when it's too late to make a coherent statement about the original topic. papa usually covers my feelings better than I could.

You can always tell a newer person from the timbre of their comments towards those of differing opinions on this board. It's nice that the long time members/frequent posters of the board have developed a mutual respect, though often differing in opinion.

I remember recently coming in here with both guns blazing in defense of GWB... then I realized that there's no point. I will continue to defend my own (and side with others who share) my opinion on this matter. In the long run though, I think the majority of us have well educated, and intentioned, points.

It is a shame to see an otherwise engaging thread brought down to a level of ignorance such as contained in bwaysinger's post.

---

stop the presses! namo, are saying that you have personal knowledge that kerry has no bush?

---

Unfortunately, I'm working a temp job at the moment that doesn't quite endorse Mojito Friday, but I am hopeful.
Of course people can make ridiculous comments or appear misinformed or just plain stupid.

For the record, I was quite aware that Papa is supporting of several issues that would be at odds with the Republican platform. I never directly addressed Papa in my post. If an attack on him specifically was inherently implied because of the placement of the post, I apologize.
But I still stand by my belief that anyone who is voting for Bush should look long and hard at the platform and the things that, by proxy, they are supporting when they vote for him.
You can disagree with part of a person's policy, but your vote ensures that the entire Republican platform gains legitimacy...and that includes things that are socially and (in my own opinion, not endorsed by the religious right or my particular denomination) morally reprehensible.

Well, gosh, Papa, no one can fault you for having an opinion. What I find funny is that Bush's unwillingness to compromise or comprehend that his immobility on many issues is at the root of his declining approval rating. Kerry may waffle but I'd rather know that someone was sitting there willing to listen and, heaven forbid, change his mind on something when he is obviously out of step with a large group of people.