MERGED-->FYM Election Poll - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
View Poll Results: Who will you be voting for, for US President?
Kerry 171 66.02%
Bush 74 28.57%
None. I'm a loser and won't vote. 4 1.54%
Other. I'm a loser too and would prefer to waste my vote on someone else in this tight race. 3 1.16%
Undecided between Bush and Kerry. 7 2.70%
Voters: 259. You may not vote on this poll

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-02-2004, 02:49 PM   #16
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
RockNRollDawgie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 3,305
Local Time: 06:21 PM
Kerry
As much as I'm not that crazy about some
of Kerry's statements, we gotta get Bush out of there!
Bush=1 term prez, just like his daddy!
__________________

__________________
RockNRollDawgie is online now  
Old 08-02-2004, 02:57 PM   #17
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 03:21 PM
As of today, Bush.



Kerry has not shown me why he would be a better leader.
__________________

__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 05:46 PM   #18
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 05:21 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
As of today, Bush.
I found this to be a little interesting. You don't sound as confident than you have in the past, or am I just reading too much into this?
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 08-02-2004, 06:17 PM   #19
Refugee
 
Danospano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,415
Local Time: 06:21 PM
It seems inevitable that John Kerry will win the election, especially with the poll on this website. However, Bush still has a war chest the size of Texas, while Kerry's in more reminisent of fraction of New England. Hopefully the money won't trample the power of reason and adroitness. Hopefully, the lesser or two evils will suffice.

I plan on voting for John for one reason. He isn't George W. Bush, for if the later is re-elected we will undoubtedly witness the end of our reign as world emperor. In my heart I wish Ralph Nader had been elected in 2000, as far-fetched as it always seemed, I still respect the man and hope he does what is prudenet, instead of what is potential right.
__________________
Danospano is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 06:26 PM   #20
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 03:21 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


I found this to be a little interesting. You don't sound as confident than you have in the past, or am I just reading too much into this?
I'm not sure I've made definitive statements on my vote in the past and will remain open minded to the facts as the campaigns continue.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 08:52 PM   #21
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 05:21 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


I'm not sure I've made definitive statements on my vote in the past and will remain open minded to the facts as the campaigns continue.
Good answer. Let me know if there's anything I can help you out with...
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 08-02-2004, 11:39 PM   #22
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 11:21 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Danospano
It seems inevitable that John Kerry will win the election, especially with the poll on this website. However, Bush still has a war chest the size of Texas, while Kerry's in more reminisent of fraction of New England. Hopefully the money won't trample the power of reason and adroitness. Hopefully, the lesser or two evils will suffice.

I plan on voting for John for one reason. He isn't George W. Bush, for if the later is re-elected we will undoubtedly witness the end of our reign as world emperor. In my heart I wish Ralph Nader had been elected in 2000, as far-fetched as it always seemed, I still respect the man and hope he does what is prudenet, instead of what is potential right.
I'm not sure if your aware of this, but the vast majority of people at FYM are democrats, liberals or lean to the left and would never think of voting for Bush really. FYM is not representive at all of the country as a whole.

After John Kerry's 4 day convention, the latest poll results from CNN/USA TODAY/GALLOP poll show that Bush is now leading Kerry despite his 4 day convention by 50% to 46%.

Not only did John Kerry not get a bounce in poll numbers from the convention, he is now slightly trailing Bush. It is the first time in 32 years that a candidate did not get a bounce from a convention.

The Republicans will have their convention starting August 30 and now have a rare opportunity to significantly build on the small lead that they have now.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 08-03-2004, 02:20 PM   #23
Refugee
 
Danospano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,415
Local Time: 06:21 PM
Yeah, but 73% to 20% (35 to 9 at this point) isn't nearly the support we saw a year ago. Mr. Bush would have polled around 40%-50% back then, so I'd say that most of us are moderates on both sides of the spectrum.

That's not to say there isn't a great deal of hostility toward the "President". Due to time contraints and mere exhaustion over debating the cons of his administration I won't mention why the majority of Americans are unsatisfied with Dubya, but I will say that your underestimating the impact of this mock poll.

You're right about there being a lack of a bounce for Kerry. I've heard many say it's due to his announcing of the VP too early in the campaign. Apparently that wasn't a normal move? I'm not sure, but my opinion on the lack of bouncing in the polls is because most registered voters already know who they're voting for, and therefore it would take a huge, miracle on Bush's behalf (terrorist attack), to save him from the fate of his father.
__________________
Danospano is offline  
Old 08-03-2004, 02:29 PM   #24
Refugee
 
ThatGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Vertigo
Posts: 1,277
Local Time: 03:21 PM
STING, you're citing the Gallup poll while ignoring the ABC/Washington Post poll and the Newsweek poll, both of which showed a bounce and put Kerry in the lead. Also, Zogby and the Wall Street Journal have done their own respective electoral vote analyses and those show a bounce that put Kerry firmly in the lead.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/
__________________
ThatGuy is offline  
Old 08-03-2004, 03:07 PM   #25
Refugee
 
Danospano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,415
Local Time: 06:21 PM
The biggest bounce I remember hearing was 4 pts. That's within the margin of error, and compared to prior national conventions it's basically zilch. Both of those facts negate the theory that Kerry was given a huge boost, or even a moderate boost. He was given at most a small boost. The key word here is 'boost'.



Another factor I just remembered is how the networks cut back coverage, therefore limiting the amount of air-time, publicity, etc. That could explain why fewer people were swayed in the polls. Ehh?
__________________
Danospano is offline  
Old 08-03-2004, 03:20 PM   #26
Blue Crack Distributor
 
LarryMullen's POPAngel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: I'll be up with the sun, I'm not coming down...
Posts: 53,698
Local Time: 06:21 PM
I hope they will give equal time to the Republican convention. If not, and their coverage expands, I smell "conspiracy theory".
__________________
LarryMullen's POPAngel is offline  
Old 08-03-2004, 03:24 PM   #27
Refugee
 
ThatGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Vertigo
Posts: 1,277
Local Time: 03:21 PM
Danospano, I agree, it was not a huge boost, and was within the margin of error. As I mentioned in my previous post, Kerry's bounce should be measured by his gain in projected electoral votes, which was pretty significant.
__________________
ThatGuy is offline  
Old 08-04-2004, 09:54 PM   #28
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 11:21 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Danospano
Yeah, but 73% to 20% (35 to 9 at this point) isn't nearly the support we saw a year ago. Mr. Bush would have polled around 40%-50% back then, so I'd say that most of us are moderates on both sides of the spectrum.

That's not to say there isn't a great deal of hostility toward the "President". Due to time contraints and mere exhaustion over debating the cons of his administration I won't mention why the majority of Americans are unsatisfied with Dubya, but I will say that your underestimating the impact of this mock poll.

You're right about there being a lack of a bounce for Kerry. I've heard many say it's due to his announcing of the VP too early in the campaign. Apparently that wasn't a normal move? I'm not sure, but my opinion on the lack of bouncing in the polls is because most registered voters already know who they're voting for, and therefore it would take a huge, miracle on Bush's behalf (terrorist attack), to save him from the fate of his father.
I have followed every poll in FYM in regards to Bush vs who ever and Bush has never received more than 10 votes in here period. I actually know the people who voted for Bush. There is a tiny minority in here that supports him.

The point is, a poll in a place like FYM is meaningless in regards to the national election. Bush has never received more than around 20% in any of these FYM polls. A State as Democratic as Massachusetts has more Bush supporters then a place like FYM.

In addition, while the poll may be representive of who post here, it is definitely not scientific poll and is worthless when it comes to predicting the outcome of the election. Any study of Statistics will tell you that. To have a national poll, you need at first to have a representive sample of the country. FYM poll is not nearly large enough to be a representive poll of the country. It is only representive of a particular group of hardcore U2 fans with access to the internet.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 08-04-2004, 10:14 PM   #29
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 11:21 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by ThatGuy
STING, you're citing the Gallup poll while ignoring the ABC/Washington Post poll and the Newsweek poll, both of which showed a bounce and put Kerry in the lead. Also, Zogby and the Wall Street Journal have done their own respective electoral vote analyses and those show a bounce that put Kerry firmly in the lead.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/
Over the years, I have found Gallup to be by far the most reliable polling organization. I'm not saying that because these current polls show something positive for the Republicans. I'm saying that based on what I have seen over the years in terms of predicting victory for various candidates in all races as well as the margin of victory.

There was no bounce in the Gallop poll for Kerry and in fact he lost a point. The "bounces" from other polls were typically around 5 points on average which is small and almost within the margin of error still.

But I will agree that in an election that is this tight, it is all about the electoral college. Kerry does not have an easy win there at all by any means, but it is true that if the election were held today based on the combined polls in the 10 toss up states, Kerry would win the election.

Most States that voted Republican or Democrat in 2000 are going to do the same in 2004, with a few exceptions. It appears that the Republicans have almost lost Ohio and could lose Missouri. If the Republicans could have just kept those two States closer to them, there would be nothing the Democrats could do.

But, Missouri is still the closest race in the country currently at 48% to 48%. If the Republicans can keep Missouri and pick up Iowa(where they have a 46% to 45% lead) and Minnesota(where they are behind 48% to 45%), then they can win the election.

I actually think they will pick up Missouri and Iowa, the question is Minnesota.

If the Republicans take Minnesota, then it will be a 275 electoral votes for Bush and 263 votes for Kerry. If the reverse happens it will be 273 electoral votes for Kerry and 265 votes for Bush.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 08-04-2004, 10:33 PM   #30
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 11:21 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by ThatGuy
STING, you're citing the Gallup poll while ignoring the ABC/Washington Post poll and the Newsweek poll, both of which showed a bounce and put Kerry in the lead. Also, Zogby and the Wall Street Journal have done their own respective electoral vote analyses and those show a bounce that put Kerry firmly in the lead.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/
Interesting thing about the electoral vote site is they have Bush ahead in Ohio, a State I don't think he can win, and then have Bush behind in Florida, a State that if Bush does not win, the election is over.

Bush has to win Florida which is why I believe he is going to. If Ohio can be a Bush win as well, then all they need is Missouri and Iowa and they can let West Virginia and New Hampshire slide to the Democrats.
__________________

__________________
STING2 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com