Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why is the election so close?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Raenelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:33 PM
Original message
Why is the election so close?
In 2000, we had a disunited party, no money, a completely corrupted press, and no ability to respond. The first person I heard say "You're not alone"--and that brought me to tears--was Michael Moore when he released his book. Plus Skippy was running as a moderate, compassionate, likable, decent fellow who would rely on the grown-up and responsible advice of the men around him.

And we still won.

Now, our party is united, raising money hand over fist, we've got the net and liberal radio, even some of the whore press is beginning to show occasional doubt about whoring for the Chimp, and the Boy Emperor's record is out there for all to see--essentially, he's a miserable failure on a grand scale, on almost any issue.

Why is this election so close? Or, :tinfoilhat: is it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
jjmalonejr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:35 PM
Response to Original message
1. Kerry landslide coming
Bush won't know what hit him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BigDaddyLove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I couldn't agree more.
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frances Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #1
12. I certainly hope Kerry wins in a landslide
But I got terribly depressed last week at an exercise class for seniors.

One woman in the class said, "Clinton and Gore lost jobs."

I piped up and said, "No they didn't. Look at the graphs. Graphs don't lie."

Then several people said, "No discussion of politics."

I agreed with that sentiment because we were there to exercise, but it was so disheartening to hear someone state that Clinton/Gore lost jobs.

This total disregard for facts reminds me of my childhood in Alabama when people would state that black people were inferior to white people. Their minds were closed to rational argument.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMDemDist2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #12
21. i get repub emails from an online gaming buddy---
so i started debunking them and sending the replies to everyone on the list she sent it to. It made me happy that out of 8 ppl, 2 wrote back to thank me (and i'd don't know any of these people)

Don't despair, but we need to SCREAM at the top of our lungs about these electronic "voting" machines before they screw us all! If you live in a state that uses them or is thinking of buying them, write your state reps and the SoState (or who ever handles the elections) and SCREAM BLOODY MURDER

We can Rock the Vote we can organize and Get Out the Vote all day long, but if they electronically steal the election we still lose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MAlibdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #12
38. ummm....
some graphs lie...

But someone arguing the Clinton years were bad employment or economic years is NUTS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wuushew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #12
39. Just remind them that Bush wants to privatize SS
anyone who keeps talking after that is either a masochist or mentally incompetent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TruthIsAll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #1
31. True. True. True.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:37 PM
Response to Original message
2. nothing about it feels like it is
i have especially seen, just cause media says it is doesnt mean it is.

i think there is manipulation going on to create as such and i think all evidence shows people are less likely to vote bush again

and finally, every number bush administration has put out is manipulated we have seen, since all numbers arent what they are looking for
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Right. Every piece of information released by * is a lie.
We have daily proof of that. It is clear that these close polls are manipulated, partly so that the press will have a "close race" to cover. It's all about profit and market share for the "new media."

Journalism is a forgotten ideal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
djg21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #2
24. It makes better ratings to have a close election.
Edited on Sun Apr-18-04 02:10 PM by djg21
Who would tune in to "Decision 2004" if the outcome opf the election was assured? Who would hire all the pundits and expert commentators to offer insight into an election that is a foregone conclusion. It doesn;t take much insight to say that because Bush has been a 'miserable failure' he has no chance of winning.

That being said, the election will be close because this country is divided, andf there are a lot of people on the right, and for that matter, toward the center, who would vote republican no matter who the candidate is. When the electorate is this divided, there aren't a huge number of cross-over voters, or "undecideds" to swing to one side and create a landslide.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bozita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
4. Both print and electronic media profit most from a close race
More readers, more listeners = higher ad rates = greater profits

"Follow the money." -- Deepthroat
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frodo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
5. Incumbency and world events.
We were the incumbent party, now they are.

It's as simple as that.

It's also true that when world security is a concern, conservatives get the upper edge (for President) in a lot of cases. Just look at the later part of the cold war... the nation was far more liberal, but elected Reagan to overwhelming landslides (while electing 50-100+ seat majorities for us in the House)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raenelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. Incumbency works when things are going good; otherwise, it's a minus
Unless you're at war, of course. But again, the war, by all accounts, if FUBAR.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frodo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #10
28. Incumbency works when things are going good AND when things
are going poorly IF voters think there is a good reason for why they are going poorly. War is a good example (as you stated), but there can be others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raenelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. Actually, incumbency is hard to read
There have been periods in history when it was a virtual shoe-in to be an incumbent, e.g., 1789 to 1824. And there have been periods when it didn't help at all, e.g., 1840 to 1896.

Other periods are hard to read, because one or the other party has been in the ascendancy--e.g., Republicans, 1896 to 1932; then the Dems, 1932 to 1968.

It's hard in this era to see trends--incumbency as a help, party dominance.
LBJ, one term
RN, two
Gerald Ford, one
Jimmy Carter, one
RR, two
Bush, one
Clinton, two

What the incumbent DOES have is the ability to distribute patronage, the Rose Garden presidential speeches, the use of AF1 instead of campaign fund.

But I wouldn't go so far as to say people tend to re-hire rather than fire the incumbent--it's murky, IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Celeborn Skywalker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:41 PM
Response to Original message
7. I think the reason is
primarily the media. The media, although bad before, have become first class whores for the Bush administration. Also, Rove and his thugs know what to say to keep people in fear and the repukes feed off fear. I still think that Kerry is going to win, but not easily.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raenelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #7
16. But they were worse in 2000, and now we have the means to combat them
And we still won.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raenelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:42 PM
Response to Original message
8. Some other things working for us that weren't before
All the passion is no on our side; before they had it.

Plus, look at the fact that Bush is playing to his base, trying to shore it up. Kerry is tacking to the center, i.e., Kerry's base is solid; Bush's is not.

Plus, I canNOT believe Nader will be the factor he was before.

I think Chimpy is one bad job report away from losing whatever grip he has.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mithridates Donating Member (21 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:43 PM
Response to Original message
9. On Culture War Issues Most Americans are on Bush's Side
On values and culture issues most Americans, who believe in God and attend church, side with Bush instead of bicoastal secularists. With Kerry they feel a strong cultural discomfort.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. Bull.
Are you saying that Kerry doesn't believe in God?

"Cultural discomfort". You sound like Hannity.

I think you've been watching Faux a bit too much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TruthIsAll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #13
29. I agree. But consider the 15 posts.
TIA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raenelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. "Most Americans" and "most Americans who believe in God and attend Church"
are two entirely different subjects. But you probably have something there--the people who support Bush are the fundies who think the Enlightenment and modern values, including reason and science and higher education, are a threat to their way of life. But that is NOT most Americans. It's not even most people of faith. The religious left, the mainstream churches, the educated Protestants and Catholics do not subscribe to Bush's cultural values.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mithridates Donating Member (21 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. Actually, it is...
The only sector of religion that exhibits any growth or vitality is the right. It is Orthodox and Mormons and Evangelicals and Muslims who grow by leaps and bounds. The Unitarian Universalists, UCC, and liberal Episcopalians are wheezing and dying. Politically, the religious left is a total non-factor.

Kerry acknowledged this when he went to Archbishop McCarrick who condemned his position on abortion and gay unions, hat in hand seeking approval. He is aware of his weakness with most Americans on values issues so he is not in a position to simply blow off the Catholic Church. To reassure most Americans, he has to act as if it matters deeply to him what the Catholic Church thinks.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMDemDist2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. speaking of Muslims, they went for * in a big way in 2000
ain't gonna happen again tho you can bet on it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raenelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #19
23. There you go again with "most Americans"
Issue for issue, except for the death penalty, most Americans lean Democratic. The problem Democrats have, because they believe in religious tolerance and freedom of individual conscience, is that they have let the Republicans promote themselves as the party of God, of traditional values (well, they are that if by "traditional" you mean a Christian state, white male dominance, women in their place, puritanical pablum in entertainment . . . blah, blah, blah, white bread shit). But, while the religious left is NOT organized politically, just as the liberal ideologues were not organized until recently, it does not mean that they are not there, it does not mean that they are not getting organized. I heard all this stuff about energy and momentum about conservatism two years ago--all the new ideas are on the right, blah, blah, blah. And it wasn't true. Conservatives were organized; liberals were not.

The religious right is a minority. Hell, it's even a minority among Republicans. It is, however, highly organized, highly vocal--and it has the power of unity. If you can tell a politician that you can deliver a voting sector, it gives you tons of clout.

This is basic poly-sci 101--Republicans are FORCED to run on cultural issues, because they can't run on economic issues. Rich people is not a big enough voting bloc. Therefore, they have to convince non-rich people that they represent them by fuzzing over their economic message and using cultural wedge issues. It's not that Democrats don't share the values of "most" Americans. It's that our big most vital issue, as James Carville so brilliantly pointed out, is the economy stupid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wuushew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #19
25. Non-sense you conviently ignore Wicca
Wiccan growth rate:
A second important statistic is the rate of growth of the Wiccan community. "In May, 1998, the Chicago Tribune reported that, though difficult to quantify due to lack of formal organization, neo-paganism is the fastest-growing religion in North America with the Internet being the prime means of proselytizing." 20 Ms. Curott estimates a doubling in size every 18 months. This growth rate seems quite high, but appears to have some credibility in the Wiccan community. The ARIS survey of the American adult population indicates a growth in the Wiccan community of 17 fold between 1990 and 2001 - the highest of any faith group monitored. This would indicate a doubling in numbers of adherents about ever 2.5 years. 25

If the latter growth rate is accurate and if it continues, then Wicca would be the third largest religious group in the U.S. by about 2012, behind Christianity and Judaism.


http://www.religioustolerance.org/wic_nbr.htm


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dawn Donating Member (876 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #25
35. He also ignores Buddhism.
It's also growing quite rapidly. But quietly. And not just on the coasts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #19
34. Hey, one note wonder...
Let's see you question the actions and motives of our abortionist in chief.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eaprez Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #9
26. HUH?
Democrats are immoral and don't attend church?
That is a mis perception spun by the right -
My denomination stands solidly for separation of church/state...
and can separate the two.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smirkymonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #9
32. Here you go with the "Bi-coastal Secularism"
again - and you only have 15 posts! Are you sure you are in the right place?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wabbajack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:46 PM
Response to Original message
11. There are a lot of morons in the country
It's as simple as that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raenelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #11
17. Good point. 50% by definition have an IQ at or below 100.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smirkymonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #17
33. Including our "Fearless" leader...
how scary is that! Government by the morans, for the morans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MikeG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:48 PM
Response to Original message
15. Some people don't want us to have a good President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David Dunham Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 01:56 PM
Response to Original message
18. The positive spin on the economy is helping prop up Bush. Won't work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pastiche423 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 02:04 PM
Response to Original message
20. See my sig line
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
27. It is not. They make it appear to be for Diebold purposes.
I noticed how they manipulated the polls right after selling us "electable Kerry"
Once that done, they came out with one that had pretty much the 2000 picture - with W slightly ahead and Nader at a whopping 6%.
Foreshadowing?
Big time turnout can cure this s*.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
36. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #36
40. its not safe
Edited on Sun Apr-18-04 03:54 PM by seabeyond
what a red lite goes off and we get shot if we put a check to kerry's name. the floor opens up and swallows us
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moondust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
37. A "close race" generates more media profits.
People won't watch coverage of a lopsided election. Media profits will dry up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Oct 31st 2014, 05:44 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC