Let us hope that history repeats itself November 2:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...directbushsfate
Full Version: History Points To Bush Defeat
Such math is questionable. Too small a sampling to be predictive.
Especially by a democratic author.
Especially by a democratic author.
QUOTE (Blather @ Oct 26 2004, 05:32 PM)
Such math is questionable. Too small a sampling to be predictive.
Especially by a democratic author.
Especially by a democratic author.
What evidence do you have of the partisan side of the author?
It is obviously predictive. If bush does win, he will have bucked the trend.
No sampling is obviously predictive. The sampling is too small and not large enough to overcome the vagaries of anecdotes.
As to the author:
I remember his NPR interview in which he takes a negative stance against Bush, also his defense of Kennedy regarding Vietnam seems a bit shallow and definately partisan. I suggest you read An Unfinished Life: John F. Kennedy, 1917-1963. Its an interesting book, though unconvincing. Dallek is a democrat by all means and generally more favorable to democratic views of foriegn policy.
As to the author:
I remember his NPR interview in which he takes a negative stance against Bush, also his defense of Kennedy regarding Vietnam seems a bit shallow and definately partisan. I suggest you read An Unfinished Life: John F. Kennedy, 1917-1963. Its an interesting book, though unconvincing. Dallek is a democrat by all means and generally more favorable to democratic views of foriegn policy.
OK, so he is a democrat.
The article was not a survey or poll.
It was a conclusion based on historical events.
Note that in todays Washington Post tracking poll Kerry has moved ahead of bush by 2 points!
The article was not a survey or poll.
It was a conclusion based on historical events.
Note that in todays Washington Post tracking poll Kerry has moved ahead of bush by 2 points!
Thank you for the acknowledgement.
It was a conclusion based on and overly small sampling. It is the same as asking two or three friends who they will vote for and assume that everyone else will vote the same way.
The sampling is too small.
From a statistical standpoint, definately too small.
It was a conclusion based on and overly small sampling. It is the same as asking two or three friends who they will vote for and assume that everyone else will vote the same way.
The sampling is too small.
From a statistical standpoint, definately too small.
QUOTE (Thaiquila @ Oct 27 2004, 02:08 AM)
OK, so he is a democrat.
The article was not a survey or poll.
It was a conclusion based on historical events.
Note that in todays Washington Post tracking poll Kerry has moved ahead of bush by 2 points!
The article was not a survey or poll.
It was a conclusion based on historical events.
Note that in todays Washington Post tracking poll Kerry has moved ahead of bush by 2 points!
soon we will be dancing in the street
Having looked at both mens policies, I don't see a substantial change. Kerry has said that he will send more troops to Iraq, that he will see it through.
He will have to renege on many of his promises since he cannot afford them, unless of course he reneges on his promise of not raising taxes for the middle class.
In either case, international business men (of other nations) that I know anecdotally are prepared to divest themselves of US assets in anticipation of what might occur. Of course this will result in a slight decrease in capital which might or might not result in a decrease in the amount of jobs. It will be interesting to see if Kerry wins, however most polls seem to show Bush ahead, specifically the Gallup poll.
For instance:
From CNN
That alone would give Bush a win.
From the CNN
Here is something that everyone should understand most assuredly. That polls have often changed drastically and been incorrect when predicting a final assessment. Many factors influence polls so this is not to say the election is done. Far from it.
I look forward to the coming days.
He will have to renege on many of his promises since he cannot afford them, unless of course he reneges on his promise of not raising taxes for the middle class.
In either case, international business men (of other nations) that I know anecdotally are prepared to divest themselves of US assets in anticipation of what might occur. Of course this will result in a slight decrease in capital which might or might not result in a decrease in the amount of jobs. It will be interesting to see if Kerry wins, however most polls seem to show Bush ahead, specifically the Gallup poll.
For instance:
QUOTE
In the CNN poll, Bush had 51 percent and Kerry 43 percent among likely voters interviewed. The result was similar among registered voters: 51 percent for Bush and 42 percent for Kerry. Independent candidate Ralph Nader drew the support of 1 percent of respondents in both categories.
From CNN
That alone would give Bush a win.
From the CNN
QUOTE
Here’s the state-by-state breakdown: (Changes from 2000 in bold)
The Bush states: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.
(32 states 291 Electoral College votes)
The Kerry states: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, DC, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington.
(18 states and DC 247 Electoral College votes)
The Bush states: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.
(32 states 291 Electoral College votes)
The Kerry states: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, DC, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington.
(18 states and DC 247 Electoral College votes)
Here is something that everyone should understand most assuredly. That polls have often changed drastically and been incorrect when predicting a final assessment. Many factors influence polls so this is not to say the election is done. Far from it.
I look forward to the coming days.
history says usually the better president wins, so bush has to win.
and screw polls I dont belive New York or NJ are voting for Kerry. Everyone in that state knows at least one person who lost someone in 9/11. If they keep that in mind, how can they vote kerry? Kerry, who voted to go to war, and voted against armor? In other words, we cant spend money on helping the people defending our country? thats how we'll get a draft, with that kind of attitude.
and screw polls I dont belive New York or NJ are voting for Kerry. Everyone in that state knows at least one person who lost someone in 9/11. If they keep that in mind, how can they vote kerry? Kerry, who voted to go to war, and voted against armor? In other words, we cant spend money on helping the people defending our country? thats how we'll get a draft, with that kind of attitude.
QUOTE (WhythelongfaceKerry @ Oct 28 2004, 12:52 AM)
history says usually the better president wins, so bush has to win.
and screw polls I dont belive New York or NJ are voting for Kerry. Everyone in that state knows at least one person who lost someone in 9/11. If they keep that in mind, how can they vote kerry? Kerry, who voted to go to war, and voted against armor? In other words, we cant spend money on helping the people defending our country? thats how we'll get a draft, with that kind of attitude.
and screw polls I dont belive New York or NJ are voting for Kerry. Everyone in that state knows at least one person who lost someone in 9/11. If they keep that in mind, how can they vote kerry? Kerry, who voted to go to war, and voted against armor? In other words, we cant spend money on helping the people defending our country? thats how we'll get a draft, with that kind of attitude.
Your assertions are completely illogical and remarkably foolish.
How could history show that the best president wins, when we only know the presidential record of the winners? How would we ever know if the losers would have been better presidents?
New York is a sure thing for Kerry. You know it and so does everyone else. Why embarrass yourself and assert differently.
New Jersey could possibly go to bush but that would be a remarkable upset.
I have news for you. We may have a draft no matter who wins. If the US military is stretched to the point where it cannot handle all the theaters of war we might be in, we will have a draft. History shows this.
P.S.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.