Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

Murdoc,
If the war thing were such a rallying point wouldn’t Bush’s numbers be higher? The neck and neck thing is indicative that it isn’t popular across the gammet, ofcourse with exception to only the most ardent republicans, hence the 50/50.

The high gas prices are in response to our dollar’s devaluation caused by the lowering of mortgage rates to rally the market. The ‘Spanster did that, but GWB is doing nothing to help remedy it and is actually good for domestic oil and big agribusiness(Bush & friends)Did you hear that drug prices are going up as of June 1st for seniors on medicare? This is my pet tablethump when you devalue the dollar and cause inflation the gas prices that go up with that effect and erode everything even though it looks, from the outset, that it helps us domestically through opening up new trade. It’s absolutely spectral of the Carter administration.

I thoroughly do think that high oil prices will have an effect on this election. Bushistas know this and in knowing it was a stumbling block made sure they accused Kerry of raising gas taxes first, covering Bush’s you know what.

This administration has no real reason to care otherwise about oil hikes and pharmeceutical costs rising or even out of control healthcare, the GOP prospers from it. The wealthier GOP contributors and many of it’s members are the ones who gain most from such policies that harm us as consumers, employees and as small business owners. And I mean that non-partisanly. To make us pay more is good for them and opens up trade negotiations for them overseas that harm us further.

It continues to infuriate me that from partisan pundits to desperate Republicans, no one wants to acknowledge why the fact the Undecided percent goes no higher than 6% and Nader’s number no higher than 7%.

That’s because both Kerry and Bush’s base of support (hovering in the mid-40s’) prevents either candidate from opening up a sizeable (10+) lead. And, that is how it will stay til November.

However, your rosy scenario murdoc, reflects what I see daily on Fox News Channel. From these ‘dead warhorse’ you may have missed the fact that a 1 cent increase in fuel prices cost airlines $180 million, not to mention the costs passed on to consumers from higher trucking costs.

The slam dunk scapegoat court-martials will not go as planned. Iraqis are expecting a no-strings attached turnover of power, and again this administration will underestimate the furor and damage done by lying. Almost immediately, there will be a demand for the US to leave - a country then secured at best by 20,000 trained Iraq police force.

You cannot claim that this election will be even more closer than 2000, then insist there is a significance in consistent margin of error polling.

I have yet to see any polling citing cracks in Kerry’s various demos, but there are the cracks in Bush’s support among Cubans reported in Newsweek, a softness among Western state Conservatives from David Broder and a Pew Poll showing a 1% difference between Bush and Kerry, in Southern states!

There is the damage Chalabi could do, the Spy scandal, the 9/11 report, new terrorists threats within our border, and you’ve got more on your plate than you realize!

Here’s an electoral map/projection that shows a different result from Murdoc’s. I have no idea which is more accurate.

http://home.comcast.net/%7Egerrydal/

It seems pretty obvious, though, that the polls don’t reflect how things will look in November. At this point in Clinton or Bush I’s first term, there was nothing scheduled between now and election day like the massive events on the horizon in the summer of 04. The Iraq handover (or lack thereof), the economic numbers, the potential for terrorist attacks—it’s all such a volatile stew that absolutely anything could happen and probably will. In political time, November seems like a decade from now.

What I find interesting, in looking at the numbers, is the real possibility that Bush could lose the popular vote again—this time by a wider margin—and still win in the electoral college. This is because of Kerry’s solidifying numbers in the coastal urban areas while many electoral votes have shifted to the red areas in the sun belt. Even if Kerry won every single vote in New York except for mine (which as a New Yawker I sometimes feel might happen), he could still lose.

If I were Pete Rose and betting on the election, I have no idea where I’d put my money. All I know is that it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

Bert, don’t read too much into the “softness” among conservatives. There’s a HUGE gulf between softness on Bush—which can be explained in a variety of ways—and a vote for Kerry. One aspect that the pollsters all seem to agree on is that Bush’s negatives and job approval numbers have a lot to do with disgruntled conservatives. Is this a problem for Bush? Yes, potentially. But Kerry’s negatives are also on the rise—and allow me to let you in on something—we conservatives REALLY don’t like THAT guy.

There have been many days in the past few months when even I, if a pollster had contacted me, would have been tempted to say that I don’t “approve” of Bush, although I can’t forsee actually voting for anybody else. But that’s because I want him to be tougher and to defend his policies more vigorously—not because I don’t agree with those policies. The disparity between job approval numbers and Bush’s numbers vs. Kerry, which are still roughly even, reflect that many probably think the same as me.

Martin,

I hear you loud and clear and you are very convincing by holding yourself up as a poster boy for crabby Conservatives!

Yet, there you go again massaging those poll numbers in new creative ways. The Pew Poll I saw showed an 8% drop in approval among Republicans - but, from 85% to 77%! Where’s the Conservative outrage?

Bush is dropping past 46% approval due to Independents, cranky Cubans and swing voting Reagan Democrats, who voted for him in 2000.

Conservatives are notoriously predictable for not being happy unless crabby about something. And, will go to DefCon Crabby 2 if ignored by the party/president and then into Pouty mode until you get a call from Fox.

Last I remember, Olympia Snow and Lincoln Chaffe were not among the neo-Con true believers, so, why were they the only ones to join McCain (the last remaining deficit hawk from the deficit hawk wing of the Republican Party) to vote against Bush’s budget?

Flip: you support an Arlen Specter with muscle mass for Gov. in California. Flop: are still seething that Bush/RNC/Rove opposed Pat ‘the chosen one’ Toomey in Pennsylvania. Fa la la la: where is the administration as the gay marriage abomination gains support?

Is there ever a fear among Conservatives of losing credibility by not sticking to principles?

skunkbud - I DON’T think the war is a “rallying point”. I think the war is less important to the average American than the economy and quality of life are.

And I’m not saying that this necessarily favors Bush, though if things keep on as they have been it probably does.

Bert- You are correct that the swing vote is quite small (about 6%). And that was reported by a Republican strategist on Fox News by the way. Which State that swing vote is located in is, therefore, very important.

I think Ohio, Michigan, and Florida are the keys and are all good swing voter States. Nader is only 7% but he could very well be a factor in Fla given that tight divide. My bet is that a good economy and gas prices are the most important issues to people in Mich and Ohio and therefore the keys to November. Whoever gets 2 out of 3 of those States wins it.

It wouldn’t be this way had the Democrats not abandoned the South.

The Mountain states are hardest hit by the gas prices since their driving distances are so much further and there is a premium for delivery to a great number of those mountain state filling stations. Just so happens, Mountain states are by and large, Republican.

Jobs aren’t improving in the Mountain states either with a few metropolitan exceptions. This could spell real trouble for getting the GOP vote out in those states.

If there is an attack by Al Qaeda of any great signifigance on an American or British target, I think Bush will take a serious hit. Even a major strike in Iraq could be the fatal blow.

I’m sure he will play the “only I can protect you card”, but this will only bolster both the Conservatives and the Left who are concerned by Bush’s policies. Kerry will then have played the “don’t cut and run card” correctly. Pat Buchanan who I find amazingly measured and sound in recent columns stated the position that Kerry could use to beat Bush.

Pat Buchanan

We’ve been left with few good choices, but Bush is the one who took us here. It isn’t Rummy or Tenet or Rice that needs firing, it is Mr. Bush.

The Dow is languishing and forecasting a sagging economic situation in 6 months.

Pete Rose is played in my home state of Ohio, and my connections there, though certainly not a scientific, crossectional sample, are leaning away from Bush.

So David, you think that rural voters in the mountain states are going to vote for Kerry because they think he’ll lower the price of gasoline? This ignores the far more important cultural affiliations of the typical rural voter of those areas.

I think George is right about Michigan, Ohio and Florida. Two out of three probably seals the deal. I know I’m a dreamer (in the words of John Lennon, but I’m not the only one) but I think there’s something potentially very interesting afoot in California with the Governator’s burgeoning popularity there. It would be a shocker, I know, but when Ah-nald starts appearing on the stage with W there, I expect that at the very least the race will tighten enough to force Kerry to spend wads of cash in places that ought to be his already. Even if Bush loses there as he’s almost guaranteed to, it’s likely to add a very interesting dynamic to the race.

I think the war is less important to the average American than the economy and quality of life are.

I thought so too murdoc, but a recent, super scientific poll on my site proved me wrong. Apparently the majority feel the war is just as important as our economy and quality of life.

So David, you think that rural voters in the mountain states are going to vote for Kerry because they think he’ll lower the price of gasoline?

I think they’ll vote for Kerry because he’s a hunter, not some flat-country farmer (a ranch has cattle).

I think there’s something potentially very interesting afoot in California with the Governator’s burgeoning popularity there.

I wouldn’t count on it. The popularity is already waning toward disillusionment. Dispite the campaign talk, Schwarzenegger is just doing business as usual.

American Pundit -

Well, your super scientific poll really shows that people are split between thinking the war is equally important and less important. I think the key is that, despite the constant barrage of war news (and virtually all bad news only) the war ISN’T the one single overriding factor in the election.

As for the Governator and California, I’ll admit that I’ve daydreamed that Bush will carry the state. I don’t really think he will, but the Governator’s presence will, I think, require more money and effort spent on the Left Coast by the Dems than they’d like, which will impact efforts elsewhere. Like Michigan, Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania.

The question is can current events turn a Red State to a Blue State and vise versa. My thinking is that the country’s political divide and the current state of affairs (perceived bad economy and perceived quagmire in Iraq) have already been factored in. Therefore, more bad news will only play in the battleground states; with the 3 I mentioned having an influence on the election outcome.

Good news, especially in the economy, will definitely help the GOP in the big 3. Great news and an improved Iraq situation might bring some surprises for Bush, but Martin’s California dreamin is probably still just that. If Baghdad hosts the 2004 Middle East Peace Summit and Al Queda declares it is no longer in the Jihad business then we could talk about landslides ala Nixon and Reagan.

As for the House and Senate, the Democrats have already given those up by way of the re-districting. They traded both to protect their own reelections….

The burning question for me is do the Democrats really want a Kerry win. To get one means that there is no progress on either the economy or Iraq, and they would therefore inherit the self described mess. Kerry’s positions are not that different from Bush’s, so conceivably he would just get pulled down by the left’s own anti-war movement. It would also mean no Clinton campaign in ’08, and I’d really hate to miss reading the Watchblog during that one.

No, Martin, but psychological research and polling research both indicate that those GOP voters will have less incentive to go to the polls. They won’t vote for Kerry, but, if in their sub-conscious, they have reservations about voting for their ‘only choice’ candidate, they will be inclined to consciously choose to do something more enjoyable on Nov. 2, like picnic, or other items on their busy todo list. This human behavior has been well researched and documented explaining why a great majority of voters who don’t vote, don’t go to the polls.

David, do you have a source for this “psychological research” on GOP voters that says they’ll stay home on November because of gas prices?The only poll on the subject I’ve seen says that 5% of Americans blame Bush for high gas prices. Do you think those 5% are Republicans—I somehow doubt it. With around 40% of the population Democrats, that means that most Democrats don’t even blame him. Considering the sense of unreality that’s taken over Democratic rhetoric lately, 5% is lower than the number of Americans who blame Bush for their acne and ingrown hairs. I don’t remember who said that GOPers might vote for Kerry because he’s a “hunter,” but I assume that person must be joking. Such a notion shows how totally out of touch and condescending blue America is towards red America.

I must say that it’s intriguing to hear leftists speculate about the “subconscience” of conservatives. Psychological studies would defintiely be interesting right now—I’d be interested in seeing how many Bush-bashers of the Michael Moore/Howard Dean/Al Gore ilk have some serious unresolved issues with their daddies that they’re projecting onto Bush. Just a thought.

One major poll showed Bush behind by just 1 point in California earlier this month (a statistical abberation, probably, because others show Kerry up by around 10). But Bush has actually led or been very close in a number of California polls this year. I’d bet anything that Bush will ultimately loose CA, but the point is that Kerry will not be able to ignore CA and avoid pumping cash into their very expensive media markets. Gore was able to pretty much take California with granted, but Kerry won’t be able to—and with such an early Dem convention, Kerry’s only going to have 75 mil to spend throughout the late summer and fall.

I’d be interested in seeing how many Bush-bashers of the Michael Moore/Howard Dean/Al Gore ilk have some serious unresolved issues with their daddies that they’re projecting onto Bush.

Haha! All the psyche studies I’ve seen concentrate on Bush’s unresolved issues with his Daddy. :)

Martin, it is ludicrous to ask if I have specific information on GOP voters as if they were a species apart from all other human beings sampled in the research on human behavior.

Have access to Google? Use it. I am not about to pull out my old PoliSci and Psychology textbooks to do your homework for you. I did mine, and know 1st hand the research is out there in textbooks. So, google concepts like “cognitive dissonance”, choice behavior, behavioral motivation, polling choice behavior, poll attendance behavior, etc.

I agree with you that Kerry cannot take Ca. for granted. Kerry may not need the money Bush has to spend after the Dem. Convention. Bush is going to have to spend twice as much to stay even, since not only does he have to get his positive message out (1/2) the money, but also defend his negative record, other (1/2) of the money. Kerry only needs to project a positive message thanks to the GOP throwing out all the dirt they could find early on: old news after the Dem Convention and spent political currency, thanks to Rove.

> I agree with you that Kerry cannot take Ca. for granted.

I disagree. As soon as Bush came out for his goofy gay marriage amendment, I knew that he didn’t have a prayer in California. Californians don’t go for THAT kind of conservatism. My intuition is backed up by the lastest Field Poll, which shows Kerry beating Bush by 12% (and that’s with 4% going for Nader).

People who think that Schwarzenegger can help Bush are fooling themselves. (And there is some indication that he isn’t too eager to help, regardless.) Ahnuld can’t give Bush CA any more than George Pataki can give him New York.

MURDOC,

**From what I’ve seen and heard of a good many republicans, personally and in media outlets, the war certainly is something that is a “Rallying point” or Fox News wouldn’t have a broadcast! Bush is the Sherriff and Kofi Annan won’t turn over documents or is it Bush is the sherriff and Freedom is gooood/french bad? Or is it Bush is the sherriff and he’s doing democratic nation building? It is a “rallying point” for many republicans.

But yet quality of life, oil prices and inflation are also great points. Bush can’t go in the opposite direction he’s a corporate shill(as was Clinton to some degree)his platform wants the the destruction he has advocated, as corporations want those measures for many reasons, low wages/exploitation of illegals/ higher oil and trucking costs/CAFTA-NAFTA/ outsourcing labor/maniacal spending/major tax cuts for big corporations/loopholes and deregulation etc.

In this election he is his own worst adversary Bush’s demons are under his own pettycoat!

(Why is he attacking Kerry? does Bush not know who and what he represents?)

Woody, you may be right. November will tell. I think the thing that will counter any leverage Bush has in Ca. is his handling of the National Debt and deficits. These issues are big on Californian’s minds in light of their own state budget/debt situation. Even my step-father is saying he won’t vote for Bush because of this and not allowing the gov’t to negotiate lower RX costs in the Medicare Bill.