A Second Look at the Second Debate

After last Friday's presidential debate, I noted it would be most interesting to see how swing or independent voters reacted to the two candidates. We now have data that shows Kerry was the clear winner among this group.

 

Here's who independents thought was the winner:

Gallup: Kerry 53, Bush 37

ABC News: Kerry 44, Bush 34

Democracy Corps: Kerry 44, Bush 33

Editor's Note: If you're concerned that the sample size of independents wasn't enough to be statistically significant, Mystery Pollster refutes this argument.

 

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2004/10/...ond_debate.html

 

 

Seems to add to the argument that they were speaking to too different audiences.

Editor's Note: If you're concerned that the sample size of independents wasn't enough to be statistically significant, Mystery Pollster refutes this argument.

 

lol. Good stuff.

 

Unfortunately Im becoming upset with the Dem slander of Nader and might be forced to abandon Kerry. :plain

Editor's Note: If you're concerned that the sample size of independents wasn't enough to be statistically significant, Mystery Pollster refutes this argument.

 

lol. Good stuff.

 

Unfortunately Im becoming upset with the Dem slander of Nader and might be forced to abandon Kerry. :plain

589274[/snapback]

I think theyve believe they have to do whatever they have to do Shamrock. Things are getting dirty yes, but a lot is at stake. If they lose the election and didnt try everything under the table to win, what regrets would there be?

 

 

There is a really good argument someone made in regarsd to why you should vote for Kerry and not Nader..Im trying to find it.

Oh, you mean like this:

 

http://www.thenaderfactor.com/press/072304/

Unfortunately Im becoming upset with the Dem slander of Nader and might be forced to abandon Kerry.? :plain

589274[/snapback]

 

What disturbs me is that dems somehow feel they're "entitled" to Nader votes by default without having to do anything in particular to earn them.

 

Nader's is clearly a far left constituency - if you want to earn those votes, you should do something to grag them in other than whine. All that does is alienate those people and drive them further from the democrats.

589403[/snapback]

 

It may disturb you, but it shouldn't surprise you. LEt's face it, THe biggest plank in the Dem's platform is that Kerry isn't Bush. And an enemy of my enemy is my friend as far as the Dems are concerned.

 

If the Dems were so ideologically inspired to do anything besides not be Bush they wouldn't of abandoned a large portion of the party and sold Dean down the river for someone more "electable."

 

This is one of the things that keeps me from voting Kerry. I find the logic of voting for him just because he isn't Bush significantly flawed.

The problem with attracting that far side of the base is that they are so far from the official platform that attempting to attract them will alienate many more voters than it will pull in, never mind the rehashing of the "L" word.

 

And if you listen closely, you will see his program: roll back the tax cuts on those who should be the first to make sacrifices during wartime (and by that I mean those making over $200k/yr), improve foreign relations (believe me, this is the one area where NOT being Bush might as well be the primary requirement), train the Iraqi army, a better prescription plan for seniors,

 

oh, and a longtime conservative platform plank: FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY!!!!!!

Unfortunately Im becoming upset with the Dem slander of Nader and might be forced to abandon Kerry.?? :plain

589274[/snapback]

 

What disturbs me is that dems somehow feel they're "entitled" to Nader votes by default without having to do anything in particular to earn them.

 

Nader's is clearly a far left constituency - if you want to earn those votes, you should do something to grag them in other than whine. All that does is alienate those people and drive them further from the democrats.

589403[/snapback]

 

It may disturb you, but it shouldn't surprise you. LEt's face it, THe biggest plank in the Dem's platform is that Kerry isn't Bush. And an enemy of my enemy is my friend as far as the Dems are concerned.

 

If the Dems were so ideologically inspired to do anything besides not be Bush they wouldn't of abandoned a large portion of the party and sold Dean down the river for someone more "electable."

 

This is one of the things that keeps me from voting Kerry. I find the logic of voting for him just because he isn't Bush significantly flawed.

589632[/snapback]

 

 

Funny since Bush's entire campaign is to make people think Kerry is a worse choice than he. Call him a dangerous flip flopper andsay I dont do that and call him a liberal. Thats really pointing out a positiev agenda right?

 

 

And if Republicans wanted to run an agenda on their beliefs, why the desire to run out Arny, Rudy, and Zell the dem? Could it be to make people think they are moderates?