The RNC

[Evilpoptart]

SO has anyone been watching the Republican National Convention? I just finished watching The Governators speech. Wow I wasn't impressed. So has anyone else watched the spectacle? Or better yet...Is anyone of their right mind going to vote Bush? :P

[JakeD]

Honestly, I'd rather have my balls pierced with a white-hot razorblade than subject myself to watching the RNC. It'd be a lot less painful and a lot more fun. Seeing as how I loathe most of the people that are popping up to give their opinions and outlook, I'm sure I'd have more fun being raped.

Addendum: Yeah, I'm not voting for Bush either, but I'm not going to count my chickens before they're hatched and say that Kerry's going to win. It seems too likely that Bush will get re-elected in spite of all the crap that he's done.

[Amaurote]

The polls this morning are showing an 11-point lead, so I think the game is pretty much up for Kerry: Bush has a peculiar polling record, in that his support levels have consistently fallen incrementally by about 1 to 2 percentile points every month, with two big exceptions, where there have been huge rises - post-9/11, and the week that the United States invaded Iraq. I think there was a minor blip about three or four months ago when he sustained his ratings, but the history of his support is one of steep rises in popularity in national emergencies, offset by marked, incessant decline when normal politics resumes.

In that context, and with Kerry's astonishingly lazy campaigning as a huge Republican pro, you can be pretty sure (a) that he'll win by a church mile in November, and (b) his second term will either be a period of concocted crises and faux security scares, or Americans in November 2008 will be the most disenchanted electorate in decades. In fact, the best policy for all RNC-haters is to go out and vote Republican in November, because after eight years of President Bush my guess is you won't see another Republican in the White House for a generation.

[Crash]

In fact, the best policy for all RNC-haters is to go out and vote Republican in November, because after eight years of President Bush my guess is you won't see another Republican in the White House for a generation.

Sounds like a plan!

[Diva]

I hope you're wrong, Amaurote... I really do. :(

Not totally off-topic (okay, I lied), this is the away message my friend has:

*** Auto-response from Augustus: As of yesterday, the Bush administration still hadn't found the source of the White House leak that outed a woman as a CIA operative. To recap, here are the things President Bush can't find: The source of the leak, Saddam's weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Osama bin laden, the link between Saddam and Osama bin laden, the guy who sent the anthrax through the mail, and his butt with two hands and a flashlight.


Edit: Gave credit to Augustus for his Away Message :p

[Amaurote]

Seriously, there's a dialectic at work here, the Republican Party's best interests are served by them not having to deal with the consequences of the political mess they've created: protectionism, a stuttering domestic economy, the spurious anti-elitist agenda of backlashism creating (of course) an even more powerful elite, and a more divided America than ever before, a monster bureaucracy at Homeland Security, more corporate welfare than ever before, an expensive, increasingly indisciplined army stationed in two of the most unsafe countries of the world, a record-breaking deficit...honestly, the worst punishment anyone could dole out to the Republicans is re-electing them to sort this all out. After four more years of this, their voter base will just erode and disappear.

The same thing happened here, back in '92: after nearly two decades of Thatcherism, Parliament could see that the economy was so weak that devaluation was inevitable - the Shadow Cabinet was even planning ahead for it, although no-one mentioned it at the time. Prominent Conservatives were openly hoping for a short spell in Opposition to a minority Labour government which would have to mop up the chaos of devaluation before falling apart and making way for a newly resurgent epoch of Conservatism. Unfortunately for them, Labour failed and they were re-elected. The pound imploded, taking the Conservatives with it. Most people here have now forgotten what a genuine Tory looks like. And most of us aren't nostalgic enough to seriously entertain the thought of returning them to office.

[Augustus]

Several things before I even read the entire post:

1) The polls showing an 11 point lead are horribly horribly wrong. Bush has a 2-4 point lead, which is still more than he's head up till now.

2) Diva tried to steal my away message, but I am taking credit for it here, lol.

[Amaurote]

I hope you're right, I really do, but it was cited over here several times this morning, and it appears to be not one, but two (http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2004/09/04/bush_poll/index.html) polls. As it is, I have absolutely no faith in John Kerry as a campaigner, his lazy, complacent campaigning just reminds me of how good Howard Dean was in comparison - Bush is like Greg Stillson from The Dead Zone ("I'M GONNA GO THROUGH THEM LIKE SHIT THROUGH A CANEBREAK"), but he has a certain amount of base charm, and knows how to speak to the Mid-West, which is where the war is going to be won.

[Augustus]

It's best to remember that Kerry does his best work campaigning from behind. He came from behind in 1996, in 2004 (the primaries), and could now. The polls being cited have various problems, and are generally not looked at as the best polls in the business. It's better to look at the tracking numbers. Bush is ahead, but its not much, and the debates will focus a lot. Kerry can be very appealing, he can be very personable (I know him and can attest to this), he just needs to start swinging a little more, and the new campaign shake up should help this.

[Poseidon]

I watched the great coverage of RNC by The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Truily a great news show. Completely impartial, since they make fun of both sides... equally

[Augustus]

Here's something on what we mentioned earlier:

Here are the post-convention national polls:
CNN/USA Today/Gallup: Bush 49%, Kerry 48% (registered voters)
CNN/USA Today/Gallup: Bush 52%, Kerry 45% (likely voters)
Zogby: Bush 46%, Kerry 44%
Newsweek: Bush 54%, Kerry 43%
Time: Bush 52%, Kerry 41%

So now it's clear Bush's lead over Kerry ranges from 1 point to 11 points. For those now totally confused, Scott Rasmussen explains why the various polls above show different results from each other and from his presidential race tracking poll which has Bush ahead by only one point. "For those who need to know the answer before the explanation, the bottom line is that the President is ahead by 4 to 5 points at this time. That's a significant improvement over the past few weeks, but not a double digit lead."

September 6, 2004--We have been flooded with e-mails asking (in varying tones of politeness) why our poll results seem different from those released by Time and Newsweek.

There are two basic explanations, one involving our polling data and one involving the newsmagazines. For those who need to know the answer before the explanation, the bottom line is that the President is ahead by 4 to 5 points at this time. That's a significant improvement over the past few weeks, but not a double digit lead.

Our current poll (showing the President ahead by just over a point) includes a Saturday sample that is way out of synch with all the days before it and with the Sunday data that followed. In fact, Saturday's one-day sample showed a big day for Kerry while all the days surrounding it showed a decent lead for the President.

It seems likely that Saturday reflects a rogue sample (especially since it was over a holiday weekend). But, it remains in our 3-day rolling average for one more day (Tuesday's report). If we drop the Saturday sample from our data, Bush is currently ahead by about 4 percentage points in the Rasmussen Reports Tracking Poll.

That's still a smaller lead than shown by Time and Newsweek. Those polls appear to have the mirror image problem of a Los Angeles Times poll in June reportedly showing Kerry with a huge lead. That LA Times survey included too many Democrats in their sample. Today, it seems likely that Time and Newsweek included too many Republicans.

Time reports that Republicans will vote for Bush by an 89% to 9% margin; Democrats for Kerry by an 80% to 9% margin; and, unaffiliated voters for Bush 43% to 39%.

Four years ago, 35% of voters were Republicans, 39% were Democrats, and the rest were unaffiliated. If you apply those percentages to the Time internals, you find Bush up by about 3 percentage points. If you do the same with the Newsweek internal numbers, you find Bush with a six point lead. Those results are very close to the Rasmussen Reports data (excluding the Saturday sample).

All of this leads me to conclude that the President is currently ahead by 4 or 5 percentage points.

For those who say turnout might be different this time, I agree. It might be different. One of our great challenges between now and Election Day is to figure out how much (if at all) the turnout will change from historic norms. Partisans from both sides seem convinced that there are special circumstance that will increase turnout for their team. Others speculate that their may be a smaller number of unaffiliated voters since events of the past four years have caused people to take sides.
Whatever the turnout differences may be, they will not be big enough to match the implications of the Time and Newsweek polls.

As always, it's useful to use common sense when reviewing poll data. If a poll suggests that 10 or 20 percent of Americans are changing their mind on a regular basis, it should be viewed with caution. Most of the time, you will find that the partisan mix of the polling sample is changing more than the actual perceptions of voters.

Yesterday, we released a brief assessment of the Bush Bounce. Based upon our 7-day Tracking data (less susceptible to one-day rogue samples), it appears that the President has gained more than five points over a three week period of time. Given the Swift Boat issue and the Republican National Convention, that seems to be a reasonable measure of the shift.

During the Republican Convention week, the President's numbers improved across the board. He took the lead in the 16-Battleground States, his Job Approval ratings went up to their highest levels in six months, and the number saying the country is moving in the right direction increased to its highest level of the year.

[kittyroze]

*hugs* for Augustus who has been gone too long.

Pos, the Daily Show is fantastic. It helps that Jon Stewart had a fantastic interview on Air America Radio :)

[Sterling]

And this is why I had the foresight to set up a small hedge arrangement. I stand to win a $100 bet if Bush gets re-elected...

[Augustus]

That's like rooting for the house in blackjack sterling :p

[Sterling]

Blackjack is a surprisingly fair game. If you don't count cards, and play otherwise correctly, the house edge is relatively thin compared to some other games on offer. If you do count cards, and adjust your play accordingly, it's possible to turn that into a small advantage for the player. (Of course, casinos don't like that so much, and so if it looks like you're doing that successfully you tend to get yourself barred.)

Personally, I only play poker in casinos. The house doesn't care whether I win or lose, because it always gets its rake either way.

[Diva]

* Diva pokes Sterling

Smartass

[Evilpoptart]

First off, Bush isnt running for RE election, he wasn't elected the first time!! One thing ALL polls neglect to mention. These people being polled are all people who voted in 2000! What about all the people who have registered since then? And if someone is registering now, you can bet its to get GW out of office, not to keep him in it.

Also, as of 2 weeks ago, I am now a volunteer for the Kerry Campaign, and been doing my part ACTIVELY to get rid of King George II. And I am going to be taking exit polls, WITH a VIDEO CREW on election day, to make sure the republicans dont STEAL another 4 years.

[Amaurote]

Well, good luck, EPT - I admire your spirit and commitment, but the more I see of Kerry, the more I wonder just where Howard Dean would be polling right now if he'd been selected. I'm pretty sure he would have failed, too, but he would have been far more energetic than the current candidate - and unlike Kerry, who seems to have no close friends, Dean has a loyal and faithful following.

[Evilpoptart]

I agree I voted for Dean in the primary, but I am for anybody but Bush at this point.

[Fire]

Um, I actually did register this year to keep GW in....
Now no one start hounding me about facts and all that BS...I don't really follow it alright?! I just don't like Kerry, the guy freaking creeps me out and I don't want him in office. Not saying that GW is any better but I'd rather have him any day...and yeah, part of it is that Bush looks out for military. I mean, Kerry would have us fighting with spitballs and slingshots...
Just my opinion.

[Ice Man]

It just goes to show that everyone loves liers and cheats. Why else would anyone sit and listen to these idiots. I guess to chose the lesser of the evils? I hate politics. I hate liers. I hate paying taxes. I.........

* Ice Man grabs back of noggin. Who hit me?

[JakeD]

It just goes to show that everyone loves liers and cheats. Why else would anyone sit and listen to these idiots. I guess to chose the lesser of the evils? I hate politics. I hate liers. I hate paying taxes. I.........

* Ice Man grabs back of noggin. Who hit me?

* JakeD points to the CIA sniper up in the clock tower.

I don't think they liked what you were saying, dude. :P

[LizardKing]

* LK hides his MkII Laser guided spitball shooter and wonders why JakeD is pointing up at him...:whome:

[Bassmama]

I WILL be voting this year- at age 53, it'll be the 3rd time in my life. The last 2 were AGAINST Ronny (I LIKE MONKEYS) RayGun.

Yes- it will be partly to get Georgie Porgie out of office, but partly because I like Kerry.

Fire- you really think that GW looks out for the military while he's sending your brothers & sisters over to fight a war that HE hoodwinked the citizens of this country into thinking was needed & used the World Trade Center as an excuse, even though NONE OF THE TERRORISTS WERE IRAQI just because Saddam 'diss'ed Daddy when he was in office? Try telling that to the families of the dead GIs as they're holding their loved ones' funerals! Try telling that to the mother of the recently killed soldier who was arrested for wearing a t-shirt to one of Jr's speaking engagements that said something to the effect of 'Geroge W Murdered My Son'. Arrested for expressing her opinion? This is America? Not MY America!

Howcome there is only ONE member of his cabinet with a family member in the military? Why aren't Georgie's twin daughters in the military instead of out drinking & drugging & whoring around?

Ask some of the vets from the Gulf war that have health & mental problems how THEY feel about the way THEY'RE being "taken care of" especially the ones that may have been poisoned by gasses/germ warfare.

You REALLY NEED to research this, not just go on who's prettier to look at.

I have one other possibility to consider- is it possible that the 'powers that be' have set things up somehow so that Kerry was chosen instead of Dean to run against GW BECAUSE he wasn't as strong a candidate & GW would win? Something to think about here.

[kittyroze]

Fire- I'd also like to add to Bass's comments. Have you heard much about what Bush is doing for veteran's benefits? The Bush admin has been cutting them left and right. Some of the reservists who are coming back from the war are being expected to pay for their own health care for injuries sustained during their time overseas.

Here are some great sites on the truth of what's going on in Iraq:

http://optruth.com/main.cfm

http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/index.cfm

http://www.truthaboutwar.org/home.shtml

If you have some time to poke around the internet to research who you're voting for, and the military is what's important to you...then check these out. I really hope you'll look into Bush and Kerry's record more (not on Fox news) more before you vote this year.

[Fire]

I never said that I thought this war was justified, I never said that he was right in sending us over there, I never said that I was behind him in that aspect. I also said that I haven't researched it a lot, and probably won't. I'm not trying to be ignorant or not see what Kerry has to offer, I'm sure he has to offer a lot. I, personally, am stuck in my mind and my opinion. Kerry creeps me out, I don't like him and I'm not voting for him. This is just my opinion and how I feel is all.

[Diva]

Nuff said.

[Bassmama]

Fire- I hope you didn't take ANY of what I wrote as being against you- it wasn't meant that way at all. I tend to get fired up when it comes to politics & how this country's 'going'. The sarcasm you hear from me is meant about the politicians & what they're doing, & I'm trying to get you to peak your interest & check things out for yourself and make up your own mind about things, not just vote blindly without knowing the history behind the candidates.

YOU are the future; YOUR SON is your future. The way things used to be & the freedoms that those of us who are older USED to enjoy are being shut down BIGTIME by candidates who seem to be more interested in keeping the rich rich while the rest of us are kept as slaves- to do the dirty work & support them with exhorbitant taxes while they & their families sit pretty & avoid getting their hands dirty. Crap- here I go again.

Anyway- don't take it personal, OK? I wasn't coming down on you at all. Just getting intense again.

[Fire]

I didn't! Kinda sounded like it but I know that anyone can get fired up over something they feel strongly about - so no worries, I know you weren't picking at me! :)

[Evilpoptart]

Well if Kerry creeps you out fire, what do you call your presidents performance in the debate the other day? Am I the only one who finds that the leader of the free world not being able to speak clearly and in complete sentences/thoughts creepy?

"The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly as necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else."
- President Theodore Roosevelt, 1912

"Throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have acted; the indifference of those who should have known better; the silence of the voice of justice when it mattered most; that has made it possible for evil to triumph."
- Haile Selassie

[Amaurote]

I can understand someone voting for George W Bush because they want more troops. I mean, the President just can't get enough of 'em. He's an army addict, that man, loves a guy in uniform (not gay guys, you understand, they lower morale in tactical formations, but good, straight, hairy, basso-voiced manly men in uniform - guy's guys, those guys are the best EVAH), just can't stop spending your money on buying more and more and more. And more. More, even. But it's well-spent, not just on wells, or down them, but also on guns and hummvees and shit like that...oh, I don't know, military shit, I guess, I don't sweat the little details. He's gone a long way, too, from drunken, bum aristocrat to the greatest military genius since Alexander the Great - but when those cynical pinko wussy liberals look back in years to come at our great leader's record, they'll say, "You know, that was a record, and one thing's for sure, it was President Bush's."

[Bassmama]

I think that he's going to be looked back on as the worst president this country has ever had. JMHO.

Now the bible-banging 'moral majority' (of which they are neither!) are gearing up to have 3 bible-banging judges appointed to the supreme court when the 3 that are expected to retire within the next few years. With the republican cogress that we now have, they'll probably succeed, too.