Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mephisto who wrote (51068)	10/2/2004 7:34:05 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 81568

NEWSWEEK POLL: BUSH LEAD GONE ____________________________ Sat Oct 02 2004 16:42:32 ET New York-Sixty-one percent of Americans who watched the first presidential debate on September 30 say Sen. John Kerry won; 19 percent say President George W. Bush won and 16 percent say they tied, according to the latest Newsweek Poll which was conducted after the debate ended. Fifty-six percent say Kerry did better than they expected; 11 percent say so for Bush. Thirty-eight percent say Bush did worse than expected; 3 percent say so for Kerry, the poll shows. The debate erased the lead the Bush/Cheney ticket has held over Kerry/Edwards in the Newsweek Poll since the Republican convention. In a three-way trial heat including Ralph Nader/Peter Camejo, among registered voters Kerry/Edwards leads Bush/Cheney 47 percent v. 45 percent with 2 percent for Nader/Camejo. In a two-way heat, Kerry/Edwards leads 49 percent v. 46 percent for Bush/Cheney, the poll shows. A 62-percent majority of viewers says Kerry seemed more confident and self-assured (26% say so for Bush) and 51 percent say Kerry had better command of issues and facts (37% for Bush). Forty-seven percent say Kerry seemed more personally likeable (41 % for Bush) and 49 percent say Kerry came closer to reflecting their own views on most foreign policy issues (43% for Bush). The two were nearly even on several other points, including who came across as a strong leader (47% Kerry, 44% Bush) and who had a better plan for dealing with the situation in Iraq (45% for both). Forty percent of viewers thought Kerry was too wordy and 57 percent thought Bush was too repetitive. Fifty-seven percent of all poll respondents say they are dissatisfied with the way things are going in the United States at this time. Bush's job approval rating dropped two points from the Sept. 9-10 Newsweek Poll to 46 percent-a 6-point drop since the poll taken during and after the Republican convention. Forty-eight percent of registered voters polled say they would not like to see Bush re-elected but almost as many (46%) say they would. Among registered voters, 60 percent say they know "a lot" about what Bush stands for, compared to 38 percent who say so about Kerry, the poll shows. During the debate, President Bush said the military would remain "an all-volunteer army," but if Bush is re-elected, 38 percent of registered voters say the draft is likely to be reinstated; 51 percent say it's not, according to the poll. If Kerry is elected president, 18 percent say the draft is likely to be reinstated; 67 percent say it is not. And 62 percent of registered voters say reinstating the draft should not be considered at this time; 28 percent say it should be considered. A 60-percent majority of registered voters say Bush administration policies and diplomatic efforts have led to more anti-Americanism around the world and 51 percent say the administration has not done enough to involve major allies and international organizations in trying to achieve its foreign policy goals, the poll shows. As for who will handle issues better overall, among registered voters Bush leads Kerry 52 to 40 percent on terrorism and homeland security; the situation in Iraq (49% vs. 44%); the situation involving Israel and the Palestinians (46% vs. 39%) and controlling the spread of nuclear weapons (47% v. 43%). Kerry scores better on the economy (52% vs. 39%); health care, including Medicare (56% to 34%) and American jobs and foreign competition (54% vs. 36%), the poll shows. Overall, 62 percent say Bush has strong leadership qualities (compared to 56% who say so for Kerry). Sixty-six percent say Bush says what he believes, not just what people want to hear, compared to 48 percent for Kerry. Sixty-five percent say Bush is personally likeable (63% say so for Kerry). But more registered voters (57%) say Kerry is honest and ethical (vs. 55% for Bush); the same amount (51%) says they would trust Kerry to make the right decisions during an international crisis as would trust Bush (51%); and more (57%) say Kerry cares about people like them (vs. 49% for Bush). And 80 percent of registered voters say Kerry is intelligent and well informed, compared to 59 percent for Bush. On Iraq, 50 percent of registered voters polled say the war in Iraq was not necessary; 46 percent say it was. And 55 percent of registered voters say going to war in Iraq has not made Americans safer from terrorism; 41 percent say it has. Fifty-one percent of registered voters say the Bush administration misinterpreted or misanalyzed the intelligence reports it said indicated Iraq had banned weapons; 41 percent say it didn't. And 45 percent say the administration purposely misled the public about evidence that Iraq had banned weapons in order to build support for the war; 50 percent say it did not. During is 19-year career in the U.S. Senate, Kerry has changed his position on a number of issues. From what they know about Kerry, 47 percent of registered voters say this is because Kerry is thoughtful and changes position as circumstances change or he learns more about an issue; the same number (47%) say it's because Kerry is politically-motivated and changes his position when he thinks it will improve his image or help him win an election. For this Newsweek Poll, Princeton Survey Research Associates International interviewed 1,013 registered voters on Sept. 30-Oct. 2, 2004. msnbc.msn.com

To: Mephisto who wrote (51068)	10/2/2004 8:52:03 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

Bush-Kerry race is again wide open _____________________ By RUPERT CORNWELL BRITISH COLUMNIST Sunday, October 3, 2004 We may not quite have had a debate. But we sure have a race. Complain all you like about the stilted format of Thursday night's confrontation at Coral Gables -- the silly colored warning lights, the lack of follow-ups, the weirdly silent audience. Even so, it was by far the most revealing episode of the campaign thus far. And my guess is that the U.S. presidential election is again wide open. Honesty compels a buyer-beware warning. My track record in these matters is lousy. I thought John Kerry capped an excellent convention in Boston with a terrific speech. Not so, was the subsequent considered judgment. I thought George Bush's speech to his convention was flat and uninspiring. It turns out to have been a winner that broke open what until then had been an even contest. Finally, I invariably underestimate the brutal effectiveness of Republican attack politics. Nonetheless, I will venture that Kerry was the clear winner of the first debate -- in what he said, how he said it and how he looked. And in doing so, he may have changed the dynamic of the contest. A presidential election is normally a referendum on the incumbent. Thus far, however, the Bush/Cheney campaign had turned standard procedure on its head. The campaign was about Kerry, his indecisiveness, his alleged "flip-flopping." Was he fit to lead the country in a time of war? But this time, the challenger was on the attack, forcing viewers to have another look at Bush. And what I, at least, saw was not pretty. In a remotely open setting, Bush is not good at defending his policies. He seemed to have brought along only 35 minutes of ideas for a 90-minute debate. Time and again the president reverted to stock platitudes, about the spread of liberty, the need to avoid "mixed messages." Once again, you realize how his White House works, without dissent, without serious critical examination of opposing viewpoints. The supreme sin is to change one's mind. The supreme virtue is certainty (aka "moral clarity"), even if the certainty is utterly wrong. Bush didn't look very good either. God bless the networks for ignoring the rule banning cut-away shots, showing the candidate who is not speaking. Kerry wore a respectfully neutral expression as Bush held forth. By contrast, when Kerry exposed him to that unaccustomed experience of criticism to his face, the president looked by turns peevish, bored and livid, his thin lips tight with disbelief that anyone dared think differently from himself. If anyone looked like a president, it was Kerry, not Bush. Where does this leave us? In presidential debate terms this was no 1996 when incumbent Bill Clinton put away Bob Dole in the first debate as the challenger failed to demonstrate why the country needed a change. With the contest tilting their man's way, Bush's handlers were hoping to wrap up the contest in a debate playing to his strong suit, as the trusted commander-in-chief in a time of war. But Kerry raised more than enough doubts to keep the contest alive. For me, the key exchange came when the president threw out one of those lazy phrases that pass for Bush-think -- justifying the attack on Iraq on the grounds that "the enemy attacked us." Kerry leapt at the chance to do what he must if he is to prevail, and draw the distinction between the war on terror and the unprovoked invasion of Iraq: "Saddam Hussein did not attack us. Osama bin Laden did." Bush was forced into a defensive crouch, "I know bin Laden attacked us." It was not the incumbent's finest hour. However, the challenger did not do what Ronald Reagan did to Jimmy Carter in 1980, using the sole candidates' debate to show he could safely be entrusted with the presidency. That year, an unpopular sitting president nonetheless entered the debate with a slight lead because of doubts about his opponent. But Reagan came across as sane and competent, who would not pull the nuclear trigger against the Soviets. Thereafter, he pulled away in the polls and won by a landslide. That will not happen this time. Kerry has a higher bar to clear. He must persuade the country to switch leaders in time of war. Implicit in that is acceptance by the people that Iraq was, as he put it on Thursday, "a colossal mistake." Bush's genius -- the trait that makes him so hard to beat -- is that his simple verities of good versus evil, democracy versus tyranny, and such fatuities as "they hate our freedom" play precisely into the preferred image Americans have of themselves. To repudiate Bush is thus to make the painful admission that you are not quite what you thought you were. With the skills of the accomplished debater that he is, Kerry last week placed that uncomfortable question on the table. Whether Americans will admit he has a point is quite another matter. _____________________ Rupert Cornwell writes for The Independent in Britain. seattlepi.nwsource.com