Devastating For Kerry
By Erick Posted in Elections — Comments (4) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
The CNN/Gallup poll shows that a majority think Kerry won the debate. Why is that bad new for Kerry?
Read on . . .
Before the debate, 52 percent of those interviewed said they planned to vote for Bush, 44 percent for Kerry and 2 percent for Ralph Nader.
By contrast, the last CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll, taken September 24-26, had 53 percent of all registered voters choosing Bush, 42 percent preferring Kerry and 3 percent favoring Nader.
Overall, 53 percent of Thursday's debate watchers interviewed said Kerry did the better job, compared with 37 percent who favored Bush.
Kerry's chief strength: 60 percent said he expressed himself more clearly than Bush did.
But 54 percent said Bush would be tougher as president, compared with 37 percent listed Kerry as tougher. And by a 48 percent to 41 percent margin, debate watchers said Bush was more likable.
Of those polled, 50 percent said Bush was more believable and 45 percent said they were more likely to believe Kerry.
More than six in 10 said that both candidates' criticisms of their opponents were fair.
On Iraq, 54 percent of debate watchers polled before Thursday's night's matchup said Bush would handle Iraq better than Kerry.
That's bad news. Further, the undecideds titled Bush after the debate. One last key piece, after the first debate in 2000, most people thought Gore did better. Within days, a majority thought Gore lost the debate.
« Question and answer time: the Wes Clark thing. — Comments (50) | Post-debate numbers — Comments (5) »
Devastating For Kerry 4 Comments (0 topical, 4 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Movies:
homepage.mac.com/duffyb/nobush
So Jimmy Carter aka Kerry wins the debate but it doesn't matter people still prefer Bush as president. Don't believe me well just look at this ABC poll.
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/Vote2004/debate_poll_040930.html
I'm sharpening my #2 pencil as I speak so I'm ready to take this global test Kerry speaks about next time we are attacked.
If Kerry won this debate than I say let him win the next two also, it won't make a difference. My vote didn't change and I don't expect many other peoples vote to change either.
I also, have entertained the notion that the Bush campaign strategists are luring Kerry into believing that he is intellectually superior to "W", by throwing the first debate. This train of thought would lead J"F'ing"K into a false sense of security, and the resulting MSM orgy would encourage him to become more reckless with words, bringing on his ultimate political demise. Sounds good, a fun ball to roll between the ears, but very dangerous when you weigh in the "fickle factor"of viewer unpredictability. This also applies to the stupid theories that Carl Rove, in his infinite wisdom, and unfallible foresight, generated, then fenced the forged Nat'l Guard memos knowing exactly how all of the domino's would fall, and when.
Both of these plot lines are best left to Tom Clancy novels, as the both seem to imply that we Republicans are more clever and devious than the opposition. My honest take on GWB's debate performance was that he was genuinely physically and emotionally drained from the day's activities of visiting with hurricane victims , and registering their concerns. J.(o)K.(e) spent his day being primped and pampered like a little poodle, getting manicured and de-oranged so he could take "best in show", which, most agree he did. Not much of a feat when you consider that GWB bears the weight of so much on his mind, while the latter, has but one.
These numbers are good by recent Kerry standards. These numbers are a success for him, believe it or not.
I think that the President deliberately underperformed tonight because he wants Kerry to become smug and lazy, then he will clobber him in the second debate. I truly believe that is what is happening. If Kerry 'wins' a second debate, then I will start to worry.