Kerry Now Leads Electoral College

[sizlinseagulsoup]

Up 280 to 239
;D

[MTBME]

Where did that come from? Move On dot org?

[off piste]

Where did that come from? Move On dot org?


Probably from http://www.electoral-vote.com

[sizlinseagulsoup]

bingo

[MTBME]

Look. On any given day there are at least 10 polls that show different results. If you cherry pick the polls, you can come up with one that gives your guy the advantage. I'm sure we can take another poll result, punch in the numbers and reverse those results. By the way, according to those results, Kerry has 168 electorial college votes described as "barely or weak". Bush has 91 in that same category.

[sizlinseagulsoup]

That site AVERAGES all the recent polls.

[Mr_Cheeze]

That site is about as unbiased as move-on.org. Check out the second paragraph.


Salon.com reports that Bush had a radio receiver taped to his back during the first debate so he could receive messages via a tiny hearing-aid-like device in his ear. They back this up with a photo. I have no way of verifying the story, but the Commission on Presidential Debates has verified that one of the rules of engagement the Bush campaign insisted on was no camera shots of the candidates from behind (which one of the pool cameras did anyway).

Who comes up with this crap? Funny, but they say nothing about the actual camera footage of John Kerry pulling an illegal object out of his jacket. Oh, I forgot, Kevin, he was just reaching into his jacket for no reason... to stretch his arm, perhaps. And Salon.com? Talk about an unabashed left leaning source.

Another interesting fact. If you go into the FAQ section, you'll actually see a question that says, "Is there one of these polls run by a Republican?" Why even have this question? It certainly implies that this is a left leaning poll.

Also, he admits that the polling data used is that of "likely voters" as opposed to registered voters. This gives an inaccurate sample, as anybody over the age of 18 is a likely voter.

Oh and last night's debate. Seems that GW held his own this time. Oh but maybe because he had a radio transmitter in his sock. ::)

[sizlinseagulsoup]

Likely voters are people who are registered that plan on going to the booth. Registered voters are people that are strictly registered, but does not mean they are even going to vote.

Moreover, electoral-vote is unbiased because it takes data from OTHER POLLSTERS.

Of course the second paragraph is revelevant to making predictions because if that story blows up in Bush's face, it will probably result in loosing hte election. He even states that this news story could be "wishful thinking"

Get a grip...

[Mr_Cheeze]

Look, before you reply again, read through the "inside" information and then try and tell me that they aren't even admitting that they are perhaps biased. Anybody can take figures and skew them any way they want, like taking polling data that shows your guy to be leading and conveniently ignoring that whioch does not. And when they refer people who "hate this website" and want a similar one that is run by a Republican to the opponents site... sorry, smells like a donkey... is a donkey.

Sorry if this undermines your excitement over the results shown here, but this website is very much left biased.

[Mr_Cheeze]

Bush and Kerry track records: Fair and balanced? (http://www.electoral-vote.com/info/records.html)

This page from this same electoral-vote.com is the best evidence yet as to the allegiance of the creator. The only "bad" thing they have to say about Kerry's so-called record is that the ACLU does not consider him to be as liberal as they prefer. What a serious inditement that is. ::)
Funny, not a single thing about his post Vietnam shenanigans or the fact that he, too, like three generations of Bush men, is a member of the Order of the Skull and Bones.

Meanwhile, they make sure you get the scoop about every bit of bad Bush press that has ever run through the mill.

[Big Game]

Sorry Kev...looks like http://www.electoral-vote.com/ has Bush's electoral college vote lead up to 291....Kerry at 228. Not that it matters, polls ain't votes.

But why worry about a race you have little control over anyway? It could go either way. Isn't it enough to know that even if John Kerry loses the presidential election, he will still be your senator? Worst case scenario, you still have 4 more years of his leadership in the senate. Hmmm. Now that I think about it, I can see why you're so anxious to get him out.

Fa fa fa.

Alright now for something less adversarial...this has the potential to be a very close race. I'm been checking out the electoral count for some spell now and every time New hampshire is adead heat. And with the Sunshine State favoring Bush at a level above (or very close to) the margin of error, I'm thinking that New Hampshire could be the next Florida. Wouldn't that be a hoot?

[Big Game]

And now I see New Jersey is a tie as well. Oh boy.

[sizlinseagulsoup]

But why worry about a race you have little control over anyway? It could go either way. Isn't it enough to know that even if John Kerry loses the presidential election, he will still be your senator? Worst case scenario, you still have 4 more years of his leadership in the senate. Hmmm. Now that I think about it, I can see why you're so anxious to get him out.


Yeah right, we get him out we really do win. Barney Frank will be his replacement senator (without a doubt) who's even more progressive. It will server our state well to have a strong presence in the legislature and be the dominate force in the executive.

[C.P.]

What about the "hanging chad" issue and election counting in Florida. Nothing on the radar indicating that the vote counting system there has been fixed. ???
A funny email came the other day from a friend, it pointed to an indication that it's been fixed!!! clever!

Official Electronic Florida Election Ballot (http://www.wearabledissent.com/101/voteresult.html)

[Big Game]

CP --- Bush is likely going to win Florida by a signifigant enough margin that the rehashed claims of anti-disunenfranchisementarinizism won't make good copy. But I guess we'll see.

[Mr_Cheeze]

Yeah right, we get him out we really do win. Barney Frank will be his replacement senator (without a doubt) who's even more progressive. It will server our state well to have a strong presence in the legislature and be the dominate force in the executive.



Bawney Fwank. Yea, another wibewal fwom Mass who has never seen a tax or a social pwogwam he didn't wike. Can't wait. He's just a fatter and wess hetewosexual Ted Kennedy... okay, maybe not fatter.

And there is that word again... pwogwessive. Bawney Fwank is SO pwogwessive. Ted Kennedy is SOOOOO pwogwessive! ::) Why do wibewals hate being called wibewals? A wibewal is a wibewal is a wibewal, dammit!

[matts5517]

WELL SAID

[sizlinseagulsoup]

Yeah right, we get him out we really do win. Barney Frank will be his replacement senator (without a doubt) who's even more progressive. It will server our state well to have a strong presence in the legislature and be the dominate force in the executive.



Bawney Fwank. Yea, another wibewal fwom Mass who has never seen a tax or a social pwogwam he didn't wike. Can't wait. He's just a fatter and wess hetewosexual Ted Kennedy... okay, maybe not fatter.

And there is that word again... pwogwessive. Bawney Fwank is SO pwogwessive. Ted Kennedy is SOOOOO pwogwessive! ::) Why do wibewals hate being called wibewals? A wibewal is a wibewal is a wibewal, dammit!


Just a question - is there anything you actually like?

[Mr_Cheeze]

Sure, I wike poking fun at those with Bawbawa Wawters-wike speech impediments. Doesn't evewybody?

[MTBME]

Barney boy might have a hard time getting past Marty Meehan who is poised to run and has already raised over 4 million to do just that. Barney... only in Massachusetts.

[Rych]

Barney boy might have a hard time getting past Marty Meehan who is poised to run and has already raised over 4 million to do just that. Barney... only in Massachusetts.



Are you talking about Marty "Term Limits" Meehan?

[MTBME]

That's the guy all right. And wasn't he suppose to clean up the campaign finance issue? He has a bigger "war chest" right now than most senators in this country, and he's only a congressman.

[Big Game]

Ah crap...Florida is now tied..Bush's projected lead down to 258 to 243. Anyone's ballgame. Fock. I'm waging a King rear hub on an Bush victory. I could really use it....my crappy XT is falling apart.

[MTBME]

I saw a poll last night that was taken of the men and women in uniform. Bush = 69%, Kerry = 29%. Right now I still feel this is Bush's election to loose. I was thinking about a vote for Nader just to show support for an alternative party. But if the military really feels this way about Bush, maybe I might throw a vote in his direction as another way of "supporting the troops". I know that might sound kind of crazy. We'll see.

[Big Game]

I saw a poll last night that was taken of the men and women in uniform. Bush = 69%, Kerry = 29%. Right now I still feel this is Bush's election to loose. I was thinking about a vote for Nader just to show support for an alternative party. But if the military really feels this way about Bush, maybe I might throw a vote in his direction as another way of "supporting the troops". I know that might sound kind of crazy. We'll see.



If not for our brave men and women sacrificing their lives, then at least for my need to have a rear wheel that isn't a total piece of ******** sh*t...please vote for Bush!

[TrailBate]

Iraq still paying off Gulf War reparations
Guardian
"On October 21, Iraq will pay $200m in war reparations to some of the richest countries and corporations in the world... as a condition of the ceasefire that ended the 1991 Gulf War, Saddam agreed to pay damages stemming from the invasion. More than 50 countries have made claims, with most of the money awarded to Kuwait. What is surprising is that even after Saddam was overthrown, the payments from Iraq have continued. Since Saddam was toppled in April, Iraq has paid out $1.8bn in reparations to the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC), the Geneva-based quasi tribunal that assesses claims and disburses awards... Here is a small sample of who has been getting 'reparation' awards from Iraq: HALLIBURTON ($18m), Bechtel ($7m), Mobil ($2.3m), Shell ($1.6m), Nestlé ($2.6m), Pepsi ($3.8m), Philip Morris ($1.3m), Sheraton ($11m), Kentucky Fried Chicken ($321,000) and Toys R Us ($189,449)."

[TrailBate]

Bush seriously practicing faith-based governance
New York Times |
"Bruce Bartlett, a domestic policy adviser to Ronald Reagan and a treasury official for the first President Bush, told me recently that 'if Bush wins, there will be a civil war in the Republican Party starting on Nov. 3... Just in the past few months,' Bartlett said, 'I think a light has gone off for people who've spent time up close to Bush: that this instinct he's always talking about is this sort of weird, Messianic idea of what he thinks God has told him to do... He truly believes he's on a mission from God.' ... Bush's top deputies - from cabinet members like Paul O'Neill, Christine Todd Whitman and Colin Powell to generals fighting in Iraq - have been told for years when they requested explanations for many of the President's decisions, policies that often seemed to collide with accepted facts. The President would say that he relied on his 'gut' or his 'instinct' to guide the ship of state, and then he 'prayed over it.'"

[MTBME]

Hmm... Didn't the New York Times just endorse John Kerry??? Just thinking out loud.

[Mr_Cheeze]

Yes, and strangely enough, the Boston Globe has also officially endorsed the Senator from MA. No, no, really... It's true!

[sizlinseagulsoup]

I saw a poll last night that was taken of the men and women in uniform. Bush = 69%, Kerry = 29%. Right now I still feel this is Bush's election to loose. I was thinking about a vote for Nader just to show support for an alternative party. But if the military really feels this way about Bush, maybe I might throw a vote in his direction as another way of "supporting the troops". I know that might sound kind of crazy. We'll see.


You realize that by doing that, you are giving away your right to vote to someone else. If the names were flipped, would you support Kerry? If the answer is yes, that's a problem.

[TrailBate]

hmm, interesting.
there's gotta be a list out there somewhere of who is endorsing who. Anyone seen one?

[Rych]

I saw a poll last night that was taken of the men and women in uniform. Bush = 69%, Kerry = 29%. Right now I still feel this is Bush's election to loose. I was thinking about a vote for Nader just to show support for an alternative party. But if the military really feels this way about Bush, maybe I might throw a vote in his direction as another way of "supporting the troops". I know that might sound kind of crazy. We'll see.


You realize that by doing that, you are giving away your right to vote to someone else. If the names were flipped, would you support Kerry? If the answer is yes, that's a problem.


Kevin,
Why does the military support Bush if he's doing such a poor job in Iraq?

[sizlinseagulsoup]

Kevin,
Why does the military support Bush if he's doing such a poor job in Iraq?


You did nothing to address my point... My point is that it is dangerous to vote for someone just based on a poll statistic. What if the military supported Kerry because they believed Bush was doing a poor job... does that mean MTBME should vote for Kerry?

But, to answer your question...

"While 64 percent of the military sample said the situation in Iraq had been worth going to war over, only 55 percent of those who served in Iraq or Afghanistan said the war had been worth it."

"The military sample was split on whether Bush had a clear plan for a solution in Iraq, with 47 percent saying he had a plan and 48 percent saying he did not."

I guess the point I am trying to make is why do they support Bush more than Kerry but do they REALLY approve of Bush and WHO took this poll. As we can see, more military men and women recognize that Bush has no vision regarding the future of this war.

Also, WHO took this poll? Well, only 55% of the people in Iraq says it was worth it. However, there is an odd statistic that "64% of the military supports it." This leads me to believe the preponderance of the polled are not serving in Iraq and do not know the horrors of what is going on.

The poll also polled "Family members of the military" meaning there are people who are being polled that are not even in the military themselves and who have sons and daughters who have not even gone to Iraq yet... Yeah... I'm sure they know what's really going on.

Finally, my favorite part... "19 percent called themselves Democrats"

Wow, only 19% of the surveyed are Democrats... now that's what the hell I call an unbiased survey!

This is nothing more than partisan propaganda trying to swing people like MTBME to vote for Bush.

[sizlinseagulsoup]

Wow... more fun data after doing some deeper research...

* 42% of those surveyed said the war cause the threat of terrorism to rise.
* 57% of those surveyed said that gays should be allowed to openly server
* 62% said Bush did not send enough troops
* 47% of military members thought photographs of Dover would increase respect of the military
* 11% low pay was the worst problem with the military, 4% said death was the worst problem Family said death 16%
* 57% only said they were getting the health care they were promised
* 30% said they thought Veterans were getting the care they were promised
* only 38% of the guard and reserves said they were trainned properly before war
* 29% of the military respondents said Pentagon officials should be punished for Abu Ghraib (that means you Rummy!) Additionally, 50% said high level Iraq commanders should be punished


Oh yeah... finally...

THE SURVEY NEVER MENTIONED KERRY

NEVER

The question that you and the papers based it off of are "Do you approve of the was George W. Bush has handled the war" Not "Do you plan on voting for Bush or Kerry (a law in 1948 disallows pollsters to ask military members who they are voting for).

They might agree with Bush on the war, but disagree with him on everything else and still vote for Kerry.

Gotta love SPIN.

[MTBME]

First of all, your right. The way the poll was taken they could not ask who they were voting for. That was stated in the newsclip I saw. They were asked something like who they supported or thought of most favorably. That was a head to head comparision of Bush and Kerry. Bush came out on top of that one as I indicated earlier.

As far as the reasoning behind my statement I go back and remind you that Kerry WILL carry Massachusetts and it's 12 electorial votes. Who I vote for won't make a difference in this state. (If we were electing on popular vote that would be different). I thought about Nader to send a message to the two main parties and to help support the idea of a viable third or even fourth party. Kerry was never an option.

[sizlinseagulsoup]

Kerry was never an option.


Alright, just making sure we didn't have a case of "the media determining votes"

Sticking it to the two parties is always good and fun though!

[TrailBate]

Kevin,
Why does the military support Bush if he's doing such a poor job in Iraq?


You did nothing to address my point... My point is that it is dangerous to vote for someone just based on a poll statistic. What if the military supported Kerry because they believed Bush was doing a poor job... does that mean MTBME should vote for Kerry?

But, to answer your question...

"While 64 percent of the military sample said the situation in Iraq had been worth going to war over, only 55 percent of those who served in Iraq or Afghanistan said the war had been worth it."

"The military sample was split on whether Bush had a clear plan for a solution in Iraq, with 47 percent saying he had a plan and 48 percent saying he did not."

I guess the point I am trying to make is why do they support Bush more than Kerry but do they REALLY approve of Bush and WHO took this poll. As we can see, more military men and women recognize that Bush has no vision regarding the future of this war.

Also, WHO took this poll? Well, only 55% of the people in Iraq says it was worth it. However, there is an odd statistic that "64% of the military supports it." This leads me to believe the preponderance of the polled are not serving in Iraq and do not know the horrors of what is going on.

The poll also polled "Family members of the military" meaning there are people who are being polled that are not even in the military themselves and who have sons and daughters who have not even gone to Iraq yet... Yeah... I'm sure they know what's really going on.

Finally, my favorite part... "19 percent called themselves Democrats"

Wow, only 19% of the surveyed are Democrats... now that's what the hell I call an unbiased survey!

This is nothing more than partisan propaganda trying to swing people like MTBME to vote for Bush.


Since soldiers are trained to follow orders without question and trust their commanders, it's no surprise they support their president. Soldiers are extremely brave and patriotic. I'm sure this poll would come up with the same results no matter who was president at the time.