Focus on War, Terror Propels Bush in Polls

[Ozoned]

linkage




Monday, April 19, 2004

WASHINGTON ? As worries about the Iraq war (search) and terrorism have pushed ahead of the economy among the public's priorities, President Bush has edged ahead of Democratic challenger John Kerry (search), national polls suggest.


The ABC-Washington Post and CNN-USA Today-Gallup polls, both released Monday, showed Bush with a slight lead over Kerry in a three-way matchup with independent Ralph Nader (search).

Bush was up 48-43 over Kerry among registered voters, with Nader at 6 percent in the ABC-Post poll. In the CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll, Bush was ahead 50-44 among likely voters, with Nader at 4 percent.

Over the past few weeks, Bush has wiped out Kerry's advantage on all domestic issues except health care insurance, where Kerry still holds a small lead, the ABC-Post poll found. Bush still holds a double-digit lead over Kerry on the war in Iraq and fighting terrorism.

Bush and Kerry are now even on who people would trust to handle the economy, at 47 percent apiece. In early March, Kerry had a 12-point lead on that issue.

Four in five in the ABC-Post poll said Bush takes a position and sticks to it. Half that many said the same about Kerry. More said Bush was honest and trustworthy, 55 percent, than said that about Kerry, 49 percent.

The ABC-Post poll of 1,201 adults, including 1,024 registered voters, was taken April 15-18; the Gallup poll of 1,003 adults, including 767 likely voters, was taken April 16-18. Both have margins of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

 

[conjur]

Kerry Leads Bush in Zogby Poll With Help of Independent Voters

April 19 (Bloomberg) -- Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry's support among independent voters is fueling his lead over President George W. Bush in the latest Zogby International survey, the polling firm said.

Kerry, a Massachusetts senator, has support from 47 percent of likely voters to Bush's 44 percent, according to the poll conducted April 15-17. Among self-described independents, Kerry, 60, leads Bush, 57, 48 percent to 38 percent. About 7 percent of voters are undecided. The survey of 1,049 adults has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

The poll also found Kerry holds a bigger lead in states that Democrat Al Gore won in 2000 than Bush does in 30 states he captured in the last election, one of the closest presidential ballots in U.S. history.

Kerry ``has strong Democratic support he'll need to counter Bush's huge support among Republicans,'' pollster John Zogby said in a statement. ``Kerry's margin over the president with independents should be a cause for concern in Bush campaign circles.''

Both campaigns have said they expect the Nov. 2 election to turn on the outcome of the vote in 17 so-called swing states where the margin between Bush and Gore in 2000 was six percent or less. Kerry and Bush today were in two of those states -- Kerry in Florida and Bush in Pennsylvania.

Gore won Pennsylvania by 204,840 votes out of about 5 million cast and Bush won Florida by a 537-vote margin out of 6 million cast after the U.S. Supreme Court stopped a ballot recount 36 days after the election.

States Won and Lost

In the states won by Gore in 2000, 53 percent of those surveyed by Zogby backed Kerry and 36 percent supported Bush.

In states that Bush won in the last election, the president attracted 52 percent support compared with 42 percent for Kerry.

Nationwide, when independent candidate Ralph Nader was included in the voter preference question, Kerry and Bush each drew 45 percent, data posted on Zogby's Web site shows. Nader, 70, a consumer rights advocate, got 3 percent support.

Half of voters said they would prefer to be led by Bush in the event of a major terrorist attack in the U.S. and 39 percent said they preferred Kerry.

Almost half of the likely voters polled -- 49 percent -- said the country was on the wrong track while 44 percent said they thought the U.S. was headed in the right direction.

Thirty percent said the economy was their biggest concern, although the Iraq war was the focus of 20 percent, a proportion that has grown in the wake of recent events, Zogby said.

The U.S.-led forces in Iraq are battling a renewed insurgency has left more than 90 military personnel dead this month, the deadliest period of fighting since the coalition invaded a year ago.

 

[josphII]

perhaps you should have bolded this part:

Nationwide, when independent candidate Ralph Nader was included in the voter preference question, Kerry and Bush each drew 45 percent, data posted on Zogby's Web site shows. Nader, 70, a consumer rights advocate, got 3 percent support.

 

[busmaster11]

Nader needs to go away. In some indirect way, I hold him accountable for the mess in the white house today.

 

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

Originally posted by: busmaster11
Nader needs to go away. In some indirect way, I hold him accountable for the mess in the white house today.

Agreed.

 

[Ryan]

Originally posted by: busmaster11
Nader needs to go away. In some indirect way, I hold him accountable for the mess in the white house today.

If he wants to run, let him. He's not responsible for anything, look toward your fellow voters if you want to blame someone you weasel. :roll:

 

[busmaster11]

Originally posted by: rbloedow

Originally posted by: busmaster11
Nader needs to go away. In some indirect way, I hold him accountable for the mess in the white house today.

If he wants to run, let him.  He's not responsible for anything, look toward your fellow voters if you want to blame someone you weasel.  :roll:

Thats where you're wrong. A two party system where the sides are philosophically opposed like what we've got here is the way to go - any more than two and you've got votes of likeminded people being divided and their least favorite candidate winning - like during the last election. You need to go back and hit the books.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: busmaster11

Originally posted by: rbloedow

Originally posted by: busmaster11
Nader needs to go away. In some indirect way, I hold him accountable for the mess in the white house today.

If he wants to run, let him.  He's not responsible for anything, look toward your fellow voters if you want to blame someone you weasel.  :roll:

Thats where you're wrong. A two party system where the sides are philosophically opposed like what we've got here is the way to go - any more than two and you've got votes of likeminded people being divided and their least favorite candidate winning - like during the last election. You need to go back and hit the books.

Hit what books? If you are suggesting a two party system is more intelligent than a multi-party system... well you're wrong. If anything I'd like there to be at least 4 or 5 major parties and hopefully those parties can stop the one issue voters from deciding elections.

 

[dmcowen674]

What's with all this party stuff?

No such thing under a Dictatorship.

 

[busmaster11]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: busmaster11

Originally posted by: rbloedow

Originally posted by: busmaster11
Nader needs to go away. In some indirect way, I hold him accountable for the mess in the white house today.

If he wants to run, let him.  He's not responsible for anything, look toward your fellow voters if you want to blame someone you weasel.  :roll:

Thats where you're wrong. A two party system where the sides are philosophically opposed like what we've got here is the way to go - any more than two and you've got votes of likeminded people being divided and their least favorite candidate winning - like during the last election. You need to go back and hit the books.

Hit what books? If you are suggesting a two party system is more intelligent than a multi-party system... well you're wrong. If anything I'd like there to be at least 4 or 5 major parties and hopefully those parties can stop the one issue voters from deciding elections.

No matter how many parties there are, one can never completely reflect the views of the knowledgeable and objective voter. And honestly, I feel that voting shouldn't be for everyone - they should at least have some general idea of whats what and where people stand on issues - even if its the facts - sans the partisanship.

 

[phillyTIM]

If the focus on the war/terror is what's pushing Bush up in the polls against Kerry, then the American people really are as screwed up as we think they are.

We Americans need to focus on saving our own homes (country) rather than that of someone else. We elected a leader for US, not THEM.

Send Bush to Iraq if he loves it so much, and let him spell his reign of terror there. Give us a leader who will make our economy and social policies better.

 

[StormRider]

Originally posted by: phillyTIM
If the focus on the war/terror is what's pushing Bush up in the polls against Kerry, then the American people really are as screwed up as we think they are.



We Americans need to focus on saving our own homes (country) rather than that of someone else. We elected a leader for US, not THEM.



Send Bush to Iraq if he loves it so much, and let him spell his reign of terror there. Give us a leader who will make our economy and social policies better.

Ironically that's what Bush's philosophy was before 9/11. He was a "hands off foreign policy" type of guy who only wanted to concentrate on the US. Unfortunately, there was a country called Afghanistan that harbored and provided safe haven for someone named bin Ladin.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: busmaster11

Originally posted by: rbloedow

Originally posted by: busmaster11
Nader needs to go away. In some indirect way, I hold him accountable for the mess in the white house today.

If he wants to run, let him. He's not responsible for anything, look toward your fellow voters if you want to blame someone you weasel. :roll:

Thats where you're wrong. A two party system where the sides are philosophically opposed like what we've got here is the way to go - any more than two and you've got votes of likeminded people being divided and their least favorite candidate winning - like during the last election. You need to go back and hit the books.

or maybe the party that feels it is losing votes needs to address the concerns of those voters, rather than calling them traitors. it's one of the few ways a minority viewpoint can be addressed in a winner take all system. otherwise, majority/large plurality views are the only ones that get addressed.

go take a look at the history and influence of the populist party.