You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #24: tritsofme, stop injecting naughty reality into a conspiracy thread [View All]

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: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
Awsi Dooger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-05 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #20
24. tritsofme, stop injecting naughty reality into a conspiracy thread
How can Truth Is All be quoted seriously in a thread like this? A year ago his 99.99% likelihood threads were all over this website. He was ignorantly using state polls as an allmighty over national polls, even though the latter have consistently demonstrated to be more accurate and up to date. Myself and others were emphasizing that all along.

Just because we had the passion and the decibel level didn't mean we had superior numbers. Every legitimate study was screaming that party ID had switched to the GOP post 9/11. White women were always going to be the critical voting block and a smalll but decisive number switched to the GOP and national security fear. I've posted this link over and again. It basically forewarns our November fate. The key word is parity, and we can't win with parity. A 2-3 point edge is a must for Democratic candidates nationwide, since Republicans are consistently more loyal. I challenge autorank and the other conspiracy minded to read it, if they dare:

Look, I despise Bush as much as anyone here. For years I wanted to pretend we could evict him in 2004. But the historical trends and basic handicapping always told me it was extremely unlikely. If a party has been in office only one term, the incumbent is given the benefit of a doubt and re-elected in overwhelming percentage. It's now 11 out of 12 since 1900. The only loss was Carter in 1976. IF Bush had a Carter-like approval rating, similar to today's, he would have been thrown out. But it was basically 50/50 and actually climbing approaching election day.

I will always believe John Edwards had the best shot. Tossing an incumbent requires a special charismatic challenger. The only two successes in my lifetime have been Reagan and Clinton. How does John Kerry fit in that group more than an upbeat populist like John Edwards? My DU evaluation of Kerry in early 2003: "Just good enough to get you beat." I wrote I would bet on Edwards over Bush, otherwise I would bet on Bush against anyone else. But on election day last year I had a bet on Kerry. Simply because I shared the hatred for Bush and wanted to pretend he was out. My Las Vegas and elsewhere betting buddies have scolded me ever since.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
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