MERGED-->FYM Election Poll

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Who will you be voting for, for US President?

  • Kerry

    Votes: 171 66.0%
  • Bush

    Votes: 74 28.6%
  • None. I'm a loser and won't vote.

    Votes: 4 1.5%
  • Other. I'm a loser too and would prefer to waste my vote on someone else in this tight race.

    Votes: 3 1.2%
  • Undecided between Bush and Kerry.

    Votes: 7 2.7%

  • Total voters
    259
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sting2, yes I would be interested in where you get your statistics. I had a source, and you listed quite a few persuasive statistics, but they're meaningless unless you have proof from neutral sources.

The goal of the Iraq "war" was to secure Americans freedoms. This conflict has created more hostility from all corners of the world, because everyone who knows the facts know it was primarily a war for oil that benefits a small percentage of wealthy American's interests.

Why protest during the convention? I think the answer lies in why President Bush won't conduct a live interview, why he won't confront his critics or allow tough questions to be asked during press conferences and rallies. If the enemy ignores you, why not knock on their front door, ehh? If Bush answered the questions the American people are asking, perhaps he wouldn't be harassed to this degree.

By the way, I think this protest is beautiful and inspiring! Amen! I can't believe they've been passing Madison Square Garden for the past 4 1/2 hours and they're still coming! Holy Cow!
 
Sting, that is not the way we lefties do politics. We protest during the event, so that the people who are there will know that there are other opinions out there. It's like group therapy, you are protesting in their presence. That's the way it's always been done, and always will. The press is there, the Republicans are there, and it's the Big Apple, and people have been organizing and working on these demonstrations for months. Some of the protest leaders, like Jesse Jackson, are connected with the Democratic Party. Others are members of peace groups from around the U.S. As a veteran protestor, I know that you protest against people, and big shots like the President-whose-policies-you-don't-like are huge targets. The communication element is being there vis-a-vis the people you're doing the protesting against.
 
CNN is reporting that about 400,000 demonstrators showed up for the march this afternoon! They'd been expecting 250,000, my goodness, the biggest demonstration I've ever been in was 4,000 right here in Birmingham when we protested a killing.
 
Danospano said:
Sting2, yes I would be interested in where you get your statistics. I had a source, and you listed quite a few persuasive statistics, but they're meaningless unless you have proof from neutral sources.

The goal of the Iraq "war" was to secure Americans freedoms. This conflict has created more hostility from all corners of the world, because everyone who knows the facts know it was primarily a war for oil that benefits a small percentage of wealthy American's interests.

Why protest during the convention? I think the answer lies in why President Bush won't conduct a live interview, why he won't confront his critics or allow tough questions to be asked during press conferences and rallies. If the enemy ignores you, why not knock on their front door, ehh? If Bush answered the questions the American people are asking, perhaps he wouldn't be harassed to this degree.

By the way, I think this protest is beautiful and inspiring! Amen! I can't believe they've been passing Madison Square Garden for the past 4 1/2 hours and they're still coming! Holy Cow!

I get my economic statistics primarily from 3 area's.

1) Macroeconomics: Principles, Problems, and Policies
Thirteenth Edition
Authored by:
Campbell R. McConnell (Professor of Economics, University of Nebraska)
Stanley L. Brue (Professor of Economics, Pacific Lutheran University)
McGraw-Hill, INC. Copyright 1996

This book has a wide range of economic statistics for the United States for the years 1929 all the way to 1994.

2) The World Book Ecyclopedia publishes an annual Yearbook every year that has a substantial amount of statistics on all countries around the world as well as the key economic indicators for the United States. I often turn to these annual volumes to fill in the statistics from 1994 up to last year.

3) For the most recent economic statistics as well as comparisons with other countries, the Economist Magazine that comes out every week as these figures in the back. Economic statistics, on unemployment, inflation, etc are compiled on a monthly basis.

4) The United Nations "Development Reports" at http://hdr.undp.org/ have all kinds of statistics for virtually every country in the world including its annual ranking for standard of living.


Oh and for the Herbert Hoover years that you claim are comparitive to the current economic conditions under George Bush lets look at the facts:

Unemployment: Hoover 24.9% Bush 5.5%

GDP Growth: Hoover minus 28.5%(the reduction in real GDP from 1929 to 1933)

Bush plus 4.8% ( the GDP growth rate for the 2nd quarter of 2004)

Inflation: minus 5.1%(Deflation) Bush 3%

Deflation is the opposite of inflation but is potentially more serious than inflation.



The United States and other member states of the United Nations have been involved for the past 12 years in attempt to get Saddam to fully comply with 17 United Nations Resolutions as well as the UN 1991 Gulf War Ceacefire agreement that authorized the use of military force against Saddam if he failed to meet the conditions and requirments of the above resolutions and ceacefire agreement.

Saddam NEVER verifiably disarmed of all WMD and failed to comply with a single UN resolution in regards to other matters as well. Sanctions, a weapons embargo, diplomacy, limited military action, had all failed achieve the requirments of the UN resolutions which included having Saddam verifiably disarmed.

Do to the impact on the security of the region and the world, and the failure of alternative means to resolve the situation, military action to resolve the issues became a necessity.

It is a fact that the Planet heavily relies on energy from the Persian Gulf Region. The Planet cannot afford to have its current energy supplies threatened with siezure or Sabotage. If such threats were to materialize the resulting situation would make the Great Depression seem like a picnic.

The abundent supply and free flow of oil, from the Persian Gulf, drives down the price of energy and benefits the poorest people in society the most! The Oil from the Persian Gulf keeps the price of energy down significantly and the people that benefit the most from low cost for energy are the people that have trouble paying for gas or heating their home!

Several Oil companies here in the United States would actually benefit from Persian Gulf Oil being reduced or taken off the market entirely. Supply and competition keep the price of energy low. Average people benefit as well as the economy when this happens to its greatest effect, not the oil companies or rich people in Washington. They generally like to see higher prices.



I actually do find your answer on why people are protesting at the convention to this degree to be a good and interesting one. I will acknowledge that the President has had less press conferences and interviews than recent presidents. Its still an open question though if the liberal left would be easier on him if he was in fact more open to a degree of their liking.

The people marching in New York City are not representive of most Americans and most would never even considering voting for a Republican. This is the liberal wing of the democratic party and if their not careful, they can hurt Kerry's chances of being elected president.
 
Amazing! We now have 31 people at FYM(the most unfriendly place for George Bush) voting for him in the poll. Exactly 33.33% at this point, 1 in 3 people.

I didn't think there were more than 10 people at FYM that would vote for Bush and now we have 31 and counting!
 
A_Wanderer said:
Thats a little bit of tinfoil hat territory if you ask me, Republican cabal secretly rigging all of the voting machines to tip the election in Bush's favour?
I can only judge by impression, and when I look at how hard the republicans have been pushing to get these machines put in, and then I hear that they're sending out mail telling people to watch their mailbox for absentee ballot forms (urging them to sign and return them) I have to wonder what's going on.

Regardless of party, I find it distasteful that these machines leave no paper trail or way to verify results. What if someone not affiliated with either party decided to tamper with the election results? How would any of us know?
 
Last edited:
Amazing new polling news! GALLUP is now reporting that Bush is now in a 47% to 47% tie for PENNSYLVANIA! Other polls are now showing Bush with a lead. This is the first time this has happened in this election year and this a State that Al Gore one in 2000. If John Kerry does not when Pennsylvania, there is no way he can win this election. Pennsylvania is worth 21 electoral votes. If John Kerry cannot win Pennsylvania, there is no way he will be able to win Ohio or Florida.

It will be interesting to see what the effect the Republican convention has on these new poll numbers.
 
Sting, every poll I know of has has Pennsylvania in a toss-up status for months. In fact, it's the only thing that Rasmussen and Zogby agree on. In any case Senator Kerry's lead there has generally been within the margin for error. One thing that polls don't tell you is how much support for a candidate is "soft", or potentially transient, or "hard", which means it's not going anywhere. This is why I really don't give a damn what the polls are saying now. The election is in two months, not next week.
 
verte76 said:
Sting, every poll I know of has has Pennsylvania in a toss-up status for months. In fact, it's the only thing that Rasmussen and Zogby agree on. In any case Senator Kerry's lead there has generally been within the margin for error. One thing that polls don't tell you is how much support for a candidate is "soft", or potentially transient, or "hard", which means it's not going anywhere. This is why I really don't give a damn what the polls are saying now. The election is in two months, not next week.

This is the first time EVER that Bush has polled higher than Kerry in Pennsylvania. I think that is very significant. A lot of the polls just a few months ago were giving Kerry a 10 point lead.

I'd also would like to point out now that electoral-vote.com is reporting that Bush is ahead with 280 electoral votes to Kerry's 242 and 17 electoral votes are tied. All of this new data conducted prior to the convention.

Bush is in an excellant position to widen his lead with the convention. Kerry will have no similar public opportunity to cut into that lead.

The election may not be today, but you would have to argue that as of today, Bush has the advantage.
 
No, the polls aren't looking great for Kerry now, and most likely Bush will have a lead coming out of the convention. The Kerry campaign has announced a $45 million advertisement buy, to coincide with the end of the GOP convention. I'm not really discouraged because it's after a really bad period for Kerry, what with the Swift Boat controversy and such, and we've still got the traditional fall campaign season ahead of us, complete with the debates and everything. In any campaign there are ebbs and flows, as they say, and in the end it plays itself out according to various and sundry circumstances. Two months is a long time in presidential politics. In just about every other democracy, an entire campaign is a matter of weeks. Weeks matter in presidential politics, too. This game's not over. There are jobs reports and developments in Iraq and such that will also determine things. This is history in the making, and usually history is pretty chaotic stuff. I should know, I'm a trained historian!
 
Last edited:
The polls in Canada were so far off base that the analysts were literally shocked as the votes came in. It was supposed to be tight between the Liberals and Conservatives, and the Conservatives were actually leading in the weeks coming up to the election, yet did disappointingly the night of.

That said, I do believe Bush will win the election. Maybe not in a landslide, but he will win again. And I also think there are many on the left who truly feel that it is better to let this go and grab 2008.
 
Elvis said:
If Bush wins....

Clinton in 08?

Now that would be interesting.

BTW... I dont mean Bill.

I think you're right on the money there.

Personally, I think the conniption fits that 90% of the right would go into, combined with the instantaneous frothing at the mouth would be hilarious to watch.
 
anitram said:
The polls in Canada were so far off base that the analysts were literally shocked as the votes came in. It was supposed to be tight between the Liberals and Conservatives, and the Conservatives were actually leading in the weeks coming up to the election, yet did disappointingly the night of.

That said, I do believe Bush will win the election. Maybe not in a landslide, but he will win again. And I also think there are many on the left who truly feel that it is better to let this go and grab 2008.

I remember that. It reinforced my view that polls are basically meaningless. I think this is a "50-50" election. Basically Kerry has a 50% chance to win the election, but so does Bush. There are indeed people on the left who think it would be better to let Bush win so they can "grab" 2008. I can't say I'm one of these people however. And I feel some sort of strange torn feeling because I also don't want an age of one-term presidents. That's not good for the country, I don't think.
 
Last edited:
I am not sure if they have remedied the switchover policy for presidents yet, the current system is messed up because there is no lead in, this can open up a window of oppertunity for terrorism because the new leader may not be as adept at handling threats as somebody who has settled in with their team, perhaps those few months after the election could be put to better use when you have a change of leadership.
 
We call the period of switching over a "transition". Sometimes these can be pretty messy, and sometimes they're pretty smooth. There is almost always controversy over at least one Cabinet nomination. It's definitely different from a switch in parties in a parliamentary system. There are things about a parliamentary form of government I prefer over our system, especially the short campaign seasons! If I had to *pay* someone for a shorter campaign season I'd do it.
 
This poll isn't going to be very representative of the election.

FYM is very heavily left-leaning, and always has been. In fact, I'm surprised Bush has as many votes in this poll as he does.

We'll only know the truth when the election results are revealed in November.
 
We had a Kerry rally in a downtown Birmingham park tonight. We had signs, candles, flags, and oh, yes, rain! Yuck! The speaker was the Chairman of the Democratic Party of Alabama, who was a classmate of Kerry's in law school. He was quite good. I'm tired, I had quite a day at the library with things to do.:yawn: Now I'm going to watch the President's speech.
 
I'm amazed that we now have 35 people in the forum supporting Bush! I honestly didn't think there was more than 10! Actually, Bush getting this many votes in a place like FYM is definitely a positive sign!
 
More likely, a large number of people have recently seen the light.
:wink:

Honestly though, there have been many polls in here and the highest number of votes Bush ever got in any of these was 11. Until now.
 
STING2 said:
I'm amazed that we now have 35 people in the forum supporting Bush! I honestly didn't think there was more than 10! Actually, Bush getting this many votes in a place like FYM is definitely a positive sign!

I honestly don't find it surprising that many people here would vote for Bush. Americans are generally conservative -- and I would guess a number of people that don't regularly post in FYM are lurking and voting in this poll (just a guess). It certainly is a positive sign if you view having a right wing extremist adminstration run the U.S. as being positive.
 
I loath bush's compassionate conservatism, I dont agree with such a domestic agenda however doomsday Islamist terrorism poses a grave threat to the world. If a government is not capable of protecting its citizens the rest of its functions are pointless and it shouldn't exist - that is why if I had a vote I would vote for Bush. Kerry would try to fight Iraq, crawl to the Europeans and encourage UN action against rogue states - it would be returning to the Clinton years of fighting terrorism like cops and robbers and there would be grave consequences.

I am voting Liberal (our conservative party) here because I find Labours policies in regards to foreign affairs to be stuck in the Keating years, innefectual waffle about looking to Asia alone while Howard has actually done that and more in that respect to both Asia and the US without straddling the fence. Not to mention their Iraq policy which makes little sense - bringing 200 troops home to fight the war on terror closer to home (like our city streets after a bomb goes of - or maybe Lakemba - which would make a bit more sense considering some of its more high profile residents).
 
I'm for Bush too! I saw the speech last night and i couldn't be more proud to have him as our president.
 
I saw his speech last night, and determined that the end of the world is near...or another fascist regime...one or the other.

I guess I should join the 'party' before I sent to a concentration camp, ehhh? Yeah, it's coming brother and sisters...this man has gone mad with power.

Did anyone else notice the ominous chanting that filled the convention hall? Reminisent of "Triumph of the Will", right?

I'm scared.
 
Everybody always says that fascism is just over the horizon, which is great really because the horizon receeds as you move forward.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom