Us presidential election 2004

[walker 0]

Hi all

John F. Kerry's favourability ratings are on the rise

Quote[/b] ]...did wonders for Kerry's image. His "favorable/unfavorable" rating, last month a tepid 48-44 percent, rose to 52-40 (while Bush's dropped from 52-44 to 49-46). A whopping 63 million voters watched the Miami debate, and Kerry was scored the winner by 61 percent of them; only 19 percent thought Bush had won. Among viewers, Kerry overwhelmingly was regarded as the better informed and more self-assured. More ominously for Bush, Kerry was seen as the stronger leader onstage (47-44 percent)—and even as the more likable guy (47-41 percent). Bush aides privately had to admit that it was a race again, understating the obvious.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6161680/site/newsweek/

As result of the the texan's failure in the Thursday debate many in the GOP campaign team were in a despondent mood after the debate. The Democrats meanwhile were happy with John F. Kerry's presedential performance.

Quote[/b] ] With 15 minutes left in the debate, silence became unease. "We heard that Kerry's people were in the spin room crowing," a Bush adviser said later. "That was disconcerting."

As well it should have been. In the Kerry racquetball court, there were cheers and mounting excitement. Their candidate was winning on style, standing ramrod straight, speaking with ease and assurance, looking plausibly presidential. Bush, by contrast, sometimes looked peeved and impatient in the split screen, his features wrinkled into a smirk. Kerryites exchanged high-fives when their man uncorked a much-rehearsed defense of his vote against funding for the war in Iraq. And they were in ecstasy when he cleverly interpreted in strictly literal fashion Bush's statement that the war in Iraq had been launched in response to 9/11. "Saddam Hussein did not attack us, Osama bin Laden attacked us," intoned the senator—shocked, shocked. The unrehearsed move produced a devastatingly theatrical moment. Exasperated, Bush could only sputter: "Of course I know Osama bin Laden attacked us. I know that." By the time grim-looking Bush aides marched into "Spin Alley," Kerry's team indeed were declaring victory.

Kind Regards Walker

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]while die hard rebublicans were so underwhelmed by the texan's performance on thursday that they are considering voting none of the above.

...

Quote[/b] ] "Bush has my vote, but this is the best election I've ever seen for voting 'none of the above.' "

and...

Quote[/b] ]Unable to cope with how badly he did the texan has resorted to lieing about how he did in some half assed fantasist way.

WoW! Kerry lied.. your point...

Quote[/b] ]

Latest polls put John F.Kerry in the lead

The affect of the debate has also made it self clear in the latest polls where John F. Kerry has gained 5% and moved in to the lead.

ok....

http://www.rasmussenreports.com has Bush still leading 49% to 46%.

ABCNEWS poll still has Bush leading 51% to 47%

erm.. Also, you forgot to mention the margin of error and the undecided which is 5%... Yes, I know the margin error is in play for rasmussen and ABCNEWS but....

[denoir 0]

Bottom line is that polls are utterly useless right now. The 30-day neural network model that I did 24/9 is pretty good so far (nine days so far), but I wouldn't put too much faith in it.

(the prediction period started on 24/9 - blue = predicted Bush, black = predicted Kerry)

If you compare it to the actual development, the model isn't so bad.

But as I said, I would not put too much faith on it. The neural network was trained on far too little data to be reliable.

It is however a far far better model than the Electoral-Predictor final projection, which is laughable as they are using linear regression.

Example: they predict that by the election day Kerry will lead in Utah:

(the thin lines are a linear regression prediction of the development). Not bloody likely, eh?

The bottom line is that as long as the difference in the polls is inside the margin of error, you can't say anything at all.

[Bernadotte 0]

It is however a far far better model than the Electoral-Predictor final projection, which is laughable as they are using linear regression.

Example: they predict that by the election day Kerry will lead in Utah:

(the thin lines are a linear regression prediction of the development). Not bloody likely, eh?

Not only will Kerry take Utah, but Bush will take Rhode Island with a 38% margin of victory according to the site's projected final map.  

But seriously folks, there are a lot of good reasons to visit www.electoral-vote.com but their projected map ain't one of them.  In fact, I don't even think the site author visits that page given we're into October and he still introduces that page with "The data are very noisy, so this map should not be taken too seriously until October."

By the way, Denoir, is there some way for your neural net analysis to digest the potential consequences of TBA capturing/killing Osama bin Laden before 2 Nov?

[denoir 0]

By the way, Denoir, is there some way for your neural net analysis to digest the potential consequences of TBA capturing/killing Osama bin Laden before 2 Nov?

No, not really. Neural nets find patterns in historical data and try to build a general model from it. It can't predict things it has no experience from.

[Bernadotte 0]

Spot the devious statisticians:

Quote[/b] ]NEWSWEEK POLL: Campaign 2004

September 11, 2004

    391  Republicans (plus or minus 6)

    300  Democrats (plus or minus 7)

    270  Independents (plus or minus 7)

Quote[/b] ]NEWSWEEK POLL: First Presidential Debate

October 2, 2004

   345 Republicans (plus or minus 6)

   364 Democrats (plus or minus 6)

   278 Independents (plus or minus 7)

The first Newsweek poll was not properly normalised or the "likely voter screen" was not applied properly.  Gallup, a Republican Party contributor, has done the same thing.  Here's a good article discussing the matter.  Please take special note of the following excerpt:

Quote[/b] ]...in this election cycle there is no question that for whatever reason, Republicans have been overrepresented by Gallup and other likely voter polls.  Take the Gallup report with Bush’s 13-point advantage, for instance. Here was the party identification among likely voters, with 7 percent more Republicans in the sample:

GOP: 305 (40 percent)

Democrat: 253 (33 percent)

Independent: 208 (28 percent)

Actual voter turnout, however, has never looked like this. In 2000, the proportion was even: 34 percent Republican, 34 percent Democrat, and 33 percent Independent. For the 20 years previous, more Democrats than Republicans voted in national elections. Adjusting Gallup’s sample composition to reflect that kind of turnout in 2004 would slash Bush’s lead. That would bring it more in line with Pew’s poll, whose sample had slightly more Democrats than Republicans.

Time-Newsweek was sharply criticised within the polling industry for how their "devious statisticians" conducted their post RNC survey.  Now, it seems they got their act together.

[Bernadotte 0]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com has Bush still leading 49% to 46%.

erm... one third of that poll was conducted before the first debate.

Also, Scott Rasmussen is a Republican.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]erm... one third of that poll was conducted before the first debate.

Also, Scott Rasmussen is a Republican.

erm....

Quote[/b] ]Interviews conducted on Friday and Saturday show Kerry with a one-point bounce so far since the debate. However, in post-debate interviews, Bush still leads 49% to 46%.

1,000 out of the 3,000 were interviewed again to get 49% to 46%...which means margin of error...

[denoir 0]

A Year After Iraq War: Mistrust of America in Europe Ever Higher, Muslim Anger Persists

Quote[/b] ]

A year after the war in Iraq, discontent with America and its policies has intensified rather than diminished. Opinion of the United States in France and Germany is at least as negative now as at the war’s conclusion, and British views are decidedly more critical. Perceptions of American unilateralism remain widespread in European and Muslim nations, and the war in Iraq has undermined America’s credibility abroad. Doubts about the motives behind the U.S.-led war on terrorism abound, and a growing percentage of Europeans want foreign policy and security arrangements independent from the United States. Across Europe, there is considerable support for the European Union to become as powerful as the United States.

.....

But one of the largest gaps between Americans and Europeans concerns the question of whether people who move to the U.S. have a better life. Americans overwhelmingly believe this to be the case – 88% say people who move to the U.S. from other countries have a better life. By contrast, just 14% of Germans, 24% of French and 41% of British think that people who have moved to the U.S. from their countries have a better life.

In election context: this is what it is about. Looking at the facts:

Quote[/b] ]

[*]Osama not captured

[*] Iraq a complete mess on the brink of civil war, no WMD found

[*] Bush's is the first presidency since Hoover's in which the American economy lost jobs

[*] Enormous budget deficit and trade imbalance. The national debt has surged as well.

So why on earth would anybody vote for Bush? Fairly simple, because Bush lives in denial about all those things and projects that. He shows a picture of America that is safer. An America that liberates oppressed people. An economically strong America...

In short, he paints a likable picture. And that's enough for a large segment of the population. There doesn't need to be any connection to reality.

And Americans are fairly nationalistic per se, so it's not difficult to slip into the comfort of Bush's version of reality. That is where Kerry loses big time as he by breaking that picture makes people feel bad about the country that they idealize so much.

[Bernadotte 0]

Quote[/b] ]erm... one third of that poll was conducted before the first debate.  

Also, Scott Rasmussen is a Republican.

erm....

Quote[/b] ]Interviews conducted on Friday and Saturday show Kerry with a one-point bounce so far since the debate. However, in post-debate interviews, Bush still leads 49% to 46%.

1,000 out of the 3,000 were interviewed again to get 49% to 46%...which means margin of error...

Then why do you suppose he didn't discard the first 1000 responses collected before the debate?  

If he reinterviewed those first 1000 then why did he discard that newer outcome and keep the older but lower Kerry result?

Like I said, Rasmussen is a Republican and, like you, not actually interested in reality.

[ralphwiggum 6]

Quote[/b] ]Interviews conducted on Friday and Saturday show Kerry with a one-point bounce so far since the debate. However, in post-debate interviews, Bush still leads 49% to 46%.

1,000 out of the 3,000 were interviewed again to get 49% to 46%...which means margin of error...

yeah. but look at how it's worded.

'Bush still leads...'

[denoir 0]

One interesting thing that I think can affect the outcome of the US election are the upcoming Australian elections.

If Labour wins they have pledged to withdraw their troops from Iraq by Christmas. It will look very bad for Bush if they do so. It will give Kerry a solid angle of attack.

Bush has little to gain by the conservatives (Howard) winning as it will just be back to status quo. He has on the other hand a lot to lose if Labour wins.

Who knows, perhaps this will be overall a bad year for the conservatives. We got Spain where they got their nuts kicked. Berlusconi in Italy is hanging by a thread. Now if Australia switches government and annonces a full withdrawal of their troops... Given the small marginals, it might very well be what kills off Bush's re-election attempt.

[Akira 0]

Anyone bring up the alleged Kerry quotes that Fox plastered all over their website, only to find out that some guy MADE THEM UP, ie none were true.

I'm to lazy to go through the few pages that I have missed...

EDIT: Pick Your President

[theavonlady 2]

Anyone bring up the alleged Kerry quotes that Fox plastered all over their website, only to find out that some guy MADE THEM UP, ie none were true.

I'm to lazy to go through the few pages that I have missed...

EDIT: Pick Your President

Yes but why don't you also tell the folks at home how Fox responded very fast, removed the quote references on the same day and apologized for it?

Fox News Pulls Item With Fake Kerry Quotes

[Bernadotte 0]

...And if the polltakers hired by NewsWeek didn't realize the obvious, they should look for a job elsewhere - maybe on 60 Mniutes.

Or maybe on Fox News.

[theavonlady 2]

...And if the polltakers hired by NewsWeek didn't realize the obvious, they should look for a job elsewhere - maybe on 60 Mniutes.

Or maybe on Fox News.

Or maybe on 60 Minutes.

Your move.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

The funny thing is that in the end the entire election will not depend on who is the favoured candidate by the people but who is favoured by the election infrastructure.

There is a grea amount of citizens that will once again be rejected by the local election-center because their registration is not accepted.

Secondly there are to electronical voting machines .... which, if something goes wrong, will never be able to offer a chance for a second counting.

Then there are those voting sheets from abroad. Some are being flown in (favourably military) others are deliberately delayed ... (US institutional workers abroad). It has been like this in the past and it will be like that once again.

So I am quite amused about all this seriousness in the debates, if, in the end... organisational skills will decide how acccurate vote is.

Keep arguing ... but make sure you know how to vote ...

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

watch the video

It doesnt reflect my views but it refers to "flip-flop Kerry"

Taking Kerry's statements out of the context and using them for an add...

For me this doesnt show anything else than that the administration is basically able to filter any info coming from the Defense Ministry and the National Secuity Agencies and to use it for their purposes.

In other words they can decide which Intel supports their political intention and publish just that. Kerry here seems to basically repeat what he was given. He neither has a real clue of the intel that is available to the administration.

Me personally I believe that in Germany the majority of top-politicians has a better insight into intel available. Or maybe not?

thanks for reading ... enjoy this as a reward

highspeed connection

Low speed connection

[Akira 0]

Anyone bring up the alleged Kerry quotes that Fox plastered all over their website, only to find out that some guy MADE THEM UP, ie none were true.

I'm to lazy to go through the few pages that I have missed...

EDIT: Pick Your President

Yes but why don't you also tell the folks at home how Fox responded very fast, removed the quote references on the same day and apologized for it?

Fox News Pulls Item With Fake Kerry Quotes

Why should I have to? Its obvious Fox doesn't even read the shit hey post as News.

Did you read the article and the quotes? Even if it was "humour" please tell us again how Fox News is unbiased. For a reporter supposedly covering the Kerry campaign objectively, he's doin' a real shitty job.

[billybob2002 0]

http://www.usatoday.com/news....s_x.htm

Quote[/b] ]

Troops in survey back Bush 4-to-1 over Kerry

By Dave Moniz, USA TODAY

An unscientific survey of U.S. military personnel shows they support President Bush for re-election by a 4-to-1 ratio. Two-thirds of those responding said John Kerry's anti-war activities after he returned from Vietnam make them less likely to vote for him.

In the survey of more than 4,000 full-time and part-time troops, 73% said they would vote for Bush if the election were held today; 18% said they would vote for Kerry. Of the respondents, 59% identified themselves as Republicans, 20% as independents and 13% as Democrats.

The survey was conducted Sept. 15-28 by the Army Times Publishing Co., which distributes the weekly newspapers Army Times, Navy Times, Air Force Times and Marine Corps Times. (Army Times Publishing is owned by Gannett, which also publishes USA TODAY.)

Army Times Publishing sent e-mails to more than 31,000 subscribers and received 4,165 responses on a secure Web site. The publisher cautioned that the results are not a scientific poll. Its readers are older, higher in rank and more career-oriented than the military as a whole.

Even so, experts who examined the survey results said they do not bode well for the Kerry campaign's efforts to woo the military, a traditionally Republican and conservative voting bloc. The Kerry campaign has highlighted his war record in an effort to burnish his credentials as a prospective commander in chief.

"You can't dismiss" the results, said Peter Feaver, a Duke University political scientist who for years has studied the political leanings of the U.S. military. Feaver said it's unlikely that Bush will receive 70% of votes cast by military personnel. But the results suggest it will be difficult for Kerry to make substantial gains among a group that has strongly supported Republican presidential candidates in the post-Vietnam era.

Feaver said he suspects Kerry is losing support among those in uniform because he seems less committed than Bush to prosecuting the war in Iraq.

Richard Kohn, a University of North Carolina history professor who has studied the political culture of the military, said the Bush campaign has been effective in creating the impression that, if elected, Kerry might "cut and run" in Iraq. "None of us who has studied Kerry's character believes that, but the Bush campaign has established in the public's mind a connection to Vietnam," Kohn said.

Kerry campaign spokesman David Wade called the Army Times Publishing effort "an inaccurate e-mail survey" and said that Kerry has "the vision and values to keep faith with military families and America's veterans."

Of survey respondents, 65% of active-duty and 67% of Guard and reserve troops said that Kerry's activities after Vietnam made them less likely to vote for him. Kerry served in Vietnam as a naval officer and was awarded a Silver Star, a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts. He protested the war after returning home.

Only 12% of active-duty troops and 16% of Guard and reserve troops said Bush's actions in the National Guard made them less likely to vote for him. Bush received a coveted pilot's slot in the Texas Air National Guard during the height of the Vietnam War and missed a number of mandatory drills after he stopped flying fighter jets in April 1972.

Active-duty, Guard and reserve troops number about 2.4 million, a small slice of the electorate. But in closely contested states such as Florida, their votes could be crucial. The survey found little difference in presidential support among the four military branches.

While there is a lot of information available on how military veterans have voted, data on the voting patterns of active-duty personnel are scarce. Feaver said experts believe military personnel favored Bush over Al Gore 2-1 in the 2000 presidential race.

A number of military analysts, including Feaver, had been predicting as recently as this summer that Bush would suffer a slight erosion this year based on a number of factors, including misgivings about the conduct of the war in Iraq and dislike of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in some military circles. Of those responding to the survey, about three-fifths said they approve of the way Bush is handling the situation in Iraq; one-quarter said they disapprove.

Military personnel who responded to the survey said they were generally happy with their jobs: 73% said they would re-enlist.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

I would agree that 1/3 of military personal votes for Kerry. However we should not forget that those soldiers currently in Iraq have a vote too and probably did not participate in the Poll.

[Blake 0]

Yes and

Quote[/b] ]Its readers are older, higher in rank and more career-oriented than the military as a whole.

Probably means those not likely on risking going to the ground doing the grunt work than privates, NCOs and junior officers. I'm also sceptical on e-mail polling. In this case people are supposed to answer a poll put up by their 'official magazine' requiring with their own e-mails addresses.

Probably military is more Bush but not with such numbers as over 70% actually.

Military magazines are generally more on the right in every country or have you ever heard of a leftist military magazine in non-communist countries.

[Bernadotte 0]

The winner of this year's Nobel Peace Prize will be named this Friday.  Although IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei is thought to have the best chance of winning, bookmakers still favour former Czech President Vaclav Havel.

Last place on this year's list is shared 4 ways between George W Bush, Tony Blair, John Howard and Slobodan Milosevic, each with odds of 1001:1.

[der bastler 0]

Just one month... then they'll decide if I ever can wear this pin again without feeling some kind of... sick.

P.S.: Will watch Fog of War tomorrow. Let's see what Bob has to report...

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Just one month... then they'll decide if I ever can wear this pin again without feeling some kind of... sick.

I hope you feel sick about this....

http://www.channel3000.com/politics/3776992/detail.html

Quote[/b] ]Swastika Burned Into Grass On Bush-Cheney Supporter's Lawn

Homeowner: 'My Signs Are Going Right Back In The Yard'

POSTED: 11:57 am CDT October 1, 2004

UPDATED: 12:31 pm CDT October 1, 2004

MADISON, Wis. -- Madison homeowners are livid after vandals defaced their homes.

Someone burned an 8-foot-by-8-foot Nazi swastika on a home's lawn near where Bush-Cheney signs were posted. The vandals used grass killer to spray the symbol.

Several nearby homes were vandalized -- all were within a two-block radius on the West Side, near Ice Age Trail, News 3 reported.

State Republican Party officials claim it's the latest in a series of desperate acts by Democrats.

Homeowners are angry, but resolute in what they plan to do next.

"I just cannot believe that someone would take the liberty to do this," said homeowner Rob Schaeffer. "We're appalled that someone would choose to destroy our property because they don't believe in our political views. My signs are going right back in the yard. This is my property. We live here. We have rights."

Police are investigating the criminal damage and told the homeowner it will be investigated as a hate crime, which carries stiffer penalties.

Copyright 2004 by Channel 3000. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

or

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/news/WABC_100304_middleschoolteacher.html

Quote[/b] ]Middle School Teacher In Trouble Over Presidential Photo?

By Ken Rosato

(Monmouth Junction-WABC, October 3, 2004) — You might say it is a symbol of the Great American Divide, a teacher putting up a picture of President Bush in the classroom. Some say it is partisanship while others say it is patriotism.

Rita Bianco, Parent: "Children should know their president and their first lady!"

Parents expressing outrage after a teacher is kicked out of her public school for hanging a picture of President Bush next to pictures of other presidents in her classroom.

Shiba Pillai-Diaz, Teacher: "It happened on a small bulletin board near the American flag and also with a poster of the Declaration of Independence."

This is Crossroads South Middle School in Monmouth Junction, New Jersey. On Thursday, there was a back-to-school night for parents of students. Veteran English teacher Shiba Pillai-Diaz says she was shocked when three parents confronted her. The three, insisting the teacher either add John Kerry's photo to the montage of presidents or remove the Bush photo. When Pillai-Diaz refused, she says the school's vice-principal threatened her job which is an act that has parents here fuming.

Paula Sjolund, Parent: "She didn't do anything wrong, and I think that it should have stayed up there."

Pillai-Diaz ultimately removed the entire bulletin board and says School Principal Jim Warfel told her she disrupted the school with her "inflammatory politics". She says he then ordered her out of the building. While she says she is a Bush supporter in her personal life, Pillai-Diaz says she keeps politics out of the classroom.

Shiba Pillai-Diaz, Teacher: "There was no political intent, nor was there any political content in that photograph nor on the bulletin board."

School officials would not talk on camera but insist nobody here has been fired. To that, Ms. Pillai-Diaz asks what does it mean then when your boss asks you to hand over the keys and kicks you out of the building? She also says she is not sure if she'll be returning to school tomorrow.

So it goes,

Billybob2002