Kerry Tops Bush in Newsweek Poll

[Spence]

Kerry has a slight lead over Bush in the new Newsweek poll, 49-46%. Fifty-two percent of Americans polled do not want Bush re-elected. Pretty much the same number who did not want him [s]elected in the first place.

[RedskinsDave]

Wait until the campaigning starts. Those numbers will change real quickly.

[Spence]

That's what I'm counting on.

[jporterweb]

For this NEWSWEEK poll, Princeton Survey Research Associates interviewed 1,006 adults aged 18 and older Jan. 22 and Jan. 23 by telephone. The margin of error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.

1006 people hardly amounts to the majority of Americans

[Patrick]

Polls ???? What a bunch of crap. Polls can be manipulated to say what ever you want them to say. Don't trust polls.

[bjohns]

I'm Republican and I'm not happy with Bush. I hope the democrats put up a candidate I can at least think about voting for. Bush's handling of the budget is irresponsible. We're right back to overspending 100s of billions a year. Clinton was a disgace as a president but at least he managed finances responsibly. Democrats are tax and spend liberals?!? The evidence seems to point to the opposite (Bush, Reagan).

[Spence]

BJOHNS, that's a great point. It's weird, but I always felt much closer to the traditional Republican position about balancing the budget and paying for whatever you buy. I've always believed that long-term budget deficits, especially big ones [and these are breaking every record in the history of the world] are incredibly immoral. Fiscal conservatism was the one thing that attracted me to the Republican party, but now that's gone. Plenty of Republicans still care about it, but not the ones who run the party. All they care about is big tax cuts for the wealthy and helping companies relocated offshore so they can avoid paying taxes at all.

One of the most important lessons for Democrats to learn from Bill Clinton is balancing the budget. Clinton's determination to balance the budget made him, at times, very unpopular in the Democratic party--especially among the Left. It proved, however, to not only be a great thing for the country, but a popular one, as well. Since they control the entire federal government, the GOP cannot blame the Democrats for this mess. If the Democrats do not get our finances in order, no one will.

[skinsfan44]

Originally posted by Patrick
Polls ???? What a bunch of crap. Polls can be manipulated to say what ever you want them to say. Don't trust polls.

Look who did the poll.

Newsweek.

Enough said.

[Spence]

Originally posted by skinsfan44
Look who did the poll.

Newsweek.

Enough said.

Well, I see your point. Newsweek is owned by The Washington Post and The Post has fallen all over itself to defend the Bush admin's many failings. Nevertheless, I trust the poll. It's possible they slanted it to make Bush look better, but I doubt it. They have professional pollsters to do this sort of thing. It's not like listening to Rush Limbaugh or anything like that.

[RedskinsDave]

Translation: If the poll favors dems, it is reliable and done by ethical pollsters. If it does not, it is a Fox news slant.

[Minnesota Mike]

Originally posted by jporterweb
For this NEWSWEEK poll, Princeton Survey Research Associates interviewed 1,006 adults aged 18 and older Jan. 22 and Jan. 23 by telephone. The margin of error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.

1006 people hardly amounts to the majority of Americans

Fair point. Plus, as Bush previously demostrated, getting into the White House has very little to with winning the votes of a majority of Americans.

[RedskinsDave]

True, and Clinton got less than 50% of the vote as well in 1996. The majority voted for someone else.

[dukeuch]

Originally posted by bjohns
I'm Republican and I'm not happy with Bush. I hope the democrats put up a candidate I can at least think about voting for. Bush's handling of the budget is irresponsible. We're right back to overspending 100s of billions a year. Clinton was a disgace as a president but at least he managed finances responsibly. Democrats are tax and spend liberals?!? The evidence seems to point to the opposite (Bush, Reagan).

Well, I can see how Clinton may have been a disgrace as a husband, but how exactly as president? What about his policies did you find so disgraceful?

[Spence]

Originally posted by RedskinsDave
Translation: If the poll favors dems, it is reliable and done by ethical pollsters. If it does not, it is a Fox news slant.

Don't be silly, Dave. I don't believe that. I've never said that or even implied it. I have some experience with pollsters and the good ones are very conscientious professionals. If Gallup comes out with a poll tomorrow that says Bush is favored for re-election by 60% of the public, I'd believe it. I'd believe it because it's Gallup and they know what they are doing.

And I don't dismiss Fox News polls either. I don't know which firm does their polling, but it is probably a very reputable one. They could certainly afford it.

[lakewinola]

Originally posted by RedskinsDave
True, and Clinton got less than 50% of the vote as well in 1996. The majority voted for someone else.

Start comparing apples to apples not oranges and apples. Bill Clinton won the presidency with more vote than anyone else. No one single candidate had more votes. You remember that Gore had more than Bush.