Poll: Bush would lose an election if held this year (CNN)

[Career Prole]

(CNN) -- A majority would vote for a Democrat over President Bush if an election were held this year, according to a CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll released Tuesday.

In the latest poll, 55 percent of the respondents said that they would vote for the Democratic candidate if Bush were again running for the presidency this year.

Thirty-nine percent of those interviewed said they would vote for Bush in the hypothetical election.

The latest poll results, released Tuesday, were based on interviews with 1,008 adults conducted by telephone October 21-23...

More at link...
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/25/poll.bush/index.html

Hey CNN...he lost in 2004 too!

America's waking up, George. You'd better pray that they don't get up on the wrong side of the bed...

[Tight_rope]

1. No shit Sherlock!

[sandrakae]

18. lot of fucking good this does us now.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[struggle4progress]

29. It was probably true last November, too. eom

[SoCalDem]

39. took the words outta my mouth

and he would not have won if the media had told the truth two years AGO OR five YEARS AGO..

[LiberalVoice]

2. Fuck you CNN.

Where the fuck were you in 2000 and 2004 when this country needed you? Pieces of shit.

[Kukesa]

6. Man, you got that right. n/t

[emulatorloo]

11. CNN too busy hyping Bush in 'o4 to do any reporting n/t

[nodehopper]

75. that is my theme song.

[davidinalameda]

3. duh!

[Patiod]

67. CNN? Wasn't this just on the cover of "Duh Magazine"?

[blm]

4. Gee...media knew most of this stuff in 2003/4 and chose to NOT TELL people

in their effort to keep Bush propped up.

[NYC Liberal]

5. Well "Democratic candidate" doesn't really do anything.

Now let's see a poll showing another Bush-Kerry matchup, one year later. These generic polls mean nothing.

[tomg]

15. While I tend to agree,

the fact that the poll has Bush running against Any Democrat could be quite good for the Dems in 2006, and could be construed as a general distrust of the Republicans. Delay, Frist, Rove, Cheney - none of the Republicans are looking very good to the average citizen, and as much as it could indicate simply buyer's remorse over the clown prince, it could equally signal a general disgust with Republicans.

Actually what concerned me was the change in the attitude toward the Iraq war. That makes no damn sense.

[underpants]

7. He didn't win last year either. He's never won a POTUS election.

what's new?

[MissWaverly]

13. Do you think the election elves will talk if Rove goes down

What do you think?

[underpants]

17. No

They will never speak. There are a very tight group. It's almost as if the powers that be have something "on" their underlings...something that they think is so damning that it keeps them 100% loyal completely obedient......

this is a theory we have been working on for a while. From a certain sense we get about many Republican politicians, mouthpieces, and operatives.

[Orsino]

25. And they're answerable to corporate masters, not to a candidate or party.

We'll see more of the grunt programmers any small-time operatives speaking out, but the boardrooms are bound by omerta.

[MissWaverly]

30. but what about Rove and his tabulators

no one in the White House will get any mileage protecting him once
he goes down

[Orsino]

37. Rove is a tool (in more ways than one).

I'm sure he fancies himself a player, and is mighty pleased with all the puffery calling him some kind of genius. He's only where he is to push an agenda, though, and the agenda will carry on without him. Even Bush is distancing himself, a bit. If Rove becomes a liability, he'll be replaced with another disposable bag man, who will be profiled in the MSM as yet another "genius."

[MissWaverly]

46. I understand your theory but I don't think so

their magic money men: Tom Delay and Jack Abramoff are no longer
able to do their thing, I think once the oceans of money dry up
and the Iraq war becomes total chaos then the magic days will be
over for the Republican party, I do think that there will be
a scramble to pack the White House with the brightest repugs to
save the cause but it is too little, too late.

[Orsino]

89. Possibly, but...

DeLay and Abramoff were lightning rods, so to speak. The Big Money's still out there, and it will still find its way to the GOP.

The trouble the Administration's in will be the big chill here, I think, rather than the neutralizing of DeLay and Abramoff. The money men will find a couple of new mules.

[MissWaverly]

92. don't think so, I think this was load and go

A lot of this came from money that was sucked out of government
money and recycled into campaign money. I believe these high
contracts resulted in kickbacks to government officials who funneled
the cash into the Republian war chest. This is gone, the government
coffers are drained dry, and people no longer trust the government 1
inch and question everything. Look at the furor over the contracts
after Katrina. Also I heard today that lawyers in Iraq are starting to say that Bush should be on trial just like Hussein is.

[underpants]

60. That's it exactly

He's no genious he has just run bad campaigns with a horrible candidate (both in the product sense and the performance sense) but has been completely covered by a compliant press. Hell they got distracted by the "planted bug" story back in Texas enough to not report on the damned debate that night.

Anyone would look like they were competent when you have the blindly obedient reading press releases as news to the blindly obedient.

[MissWaverly]

28. What about the paranoia over the new sequoia president

they won't even let him in the country, but everybody knows that
the machines weren't rigged on 04

[enki23]

8. it's a lot easier to say that about an unnamed, unsmeared democrat

but i can't really bring myself to actually believe it, given the modern republican party's penchant for disgustingly unethical, ranging to outright criminal behavior.

[bain_sidhe]

9. Sigh

Thirty-nine percent of those interviewed said they would vote for Bush in the hypothetical election.

Unfuckingbelievable.

[yorkiemommie1]

26. there's that base

again

[SoCalDem]

40. Yep it's the same 30% who hated Clinton so much

the other 9 are probaby just dummies who couldn't line up the circles and voted for the wrong one :)

[yorkiemommie1]

48. lol !

n/t

[0007]

10. So CNN is saying the other two elections were on the square?

Hulk Hogan is more creditable than CNN.

[drb]

12. Another trifecta for Georgie! That makes 3 in a row he lost!!!

nt

[eowyn_of_rohan]

32. On some subjects, it is like we are all of one mind here

Kinda Borgie
:toast:

[Barrett808]

14. Iraq war a mistake: "dramatic shift downward"?

And there was a dramatic shift downward in the latest poll, compared with September, in the percentage of people who said that it was a mistake to send U.S. troops to Iraq.

This time, 49 percent said it was a mistake, versus 59 percent who felt that way last month.

What's up with that? Dupes falling for the Potempkin referendum?

[Ilsa]

16. Why? Because he's not in control of the voting machines anymore? eom

[EFerrari]

19. Cr@P Not News. n/t

[swimmernsecretsea]

20. Great. Now you tell us...

Where were you last time, CNN? Asleep at the wheel?

[bunny planet]

21. No surprise, because he also lost the election that was held last year.

[Miss Chybil]

22. Uh, he lost it last year... nt

[Amonester]

42. Yes, and he lost it five years ago also... nt

:dem:

[Miss Chybil]

83. How right you are... nt

[bluestateguy]

23. Poorly worded poll

The pollster should have named a Democratic candidate by name. Was that so hard to do? Of course, Bush would lose to an "unnamed Democrat". The unnamed Democrat is Prince Charming, a person with no faults at all, representing the perfect candidate that people have no objections to. The pollster should have named John Kerry by name, or named Hillary Clinton by name. These unnamed Democrat scenarios are not very useful.

[lancdem]

44. You're right, of course

but for an incumbent prez to get less than 40 percent in a generic matchup is still bad.

[second edition]

63. I think they purposely worded it this way so that Kerry wouldn't

receive any credit and other Dem's could speculate. I find it hard to believe that people would vote for just any candidate without knowing more about them.

[Ignacio Upton]

81. Bush has also been losing to an Unnamed Democrat since 2003

When you put up an real candidate, then it becomes easy to define him/her and to shape public opinion in a way that helps Bush more than helping the Democratic candidate.

[olddad56]

24. I don't think he will be running again, but if he did....

he would not win, he would only retain the office. He didn't win in 2000 or 2004.

[natrat]

27. big fucking deal--E voting fraud in key places would turn that

[robbedvoter]

31. Umm, CNN, pssst! he lost it last year too. Pass it on.

[Theres-a]

47. don't forget '00

I believe Florida was handed to him.

[BootinUp]

33. What are you prepared to do?!

I just always liked that line from the movie the Untouchables.

or how about

Stop crying in your teacups!



(I'm tryin to boost my spirits here.) *sigh*

[nvliberal]

34. WTF, CNN? Bush lost 2000 and 2004, and it didn't stop him

from stealing the White House.

[SharonRB]

35. Doh

A year late and a dollar short. Why couldn't all this crap have happened at this time last year?

[oregonindy]

36. and he lost in 2000

[malaise]

38. Rememebr the Ohio Exit Polls

without those sudden 'shifts' he would have lost last year.

[cassiepriam]

41. Lose an election??? HE SHOULD BE IN JAIL.

I think the world has gone totally crazy.

[primavera]

68. Thank you!

I'm so glad to know that I'm not alone in feeling that the shrub out of public office making $20,000/hour on the lecture circuit somehow falls short of what is called for. Ideally, my fantasy is to see his head on a pike with crows pecking at his eyeballs, but I'll settle for him going to jail. But he, his administration, and everything they stand for, need to be publicly disgraced and discredited.

[cassiepriam]

84. Yes, yes. Forget about low approval ratings.

He needs to be tarred and feathered.

[Justyce]

43. How is this going to affect his mandate??

:eyes:

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jefferson_dem]

49. Poll: Bush would lose an election if held this year (Dems preferred also)

(CNN) -- A majority would vote for a Democrat over President Bush if an election were held this year, according to a CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll released Tuesday.

In the latest poll, 55 percent of the respondents said that they would vote for the Democratic candidate if Bush were again running for the presidency this year.

Thirty-nine percent of those interviewed said they would vote for Bush in the hypothetical election.

<SNIP>

In the poll, 42 percent of those interviewed approved of the way the president is handling his job and 55 percent disapproved. In the previous poll, released October 17, 39 percent approved of Bush's job performance -- the lowest number of his presidency -- and 58 percent disapproved.

<SNIP>

On separate issues, a majority of those questioned felt the Democrats could do a better job than Republicans at handling health care (59 percent to 30 percent), Social Security (56 percent to 33 percent), gasoline prices (51 percent to 31 percent) and the economy (50 percent to 38 percent).

Forty-six percent also believed Democrats could do better at handling Iraq, while 40 percent said the GOP would do better.

<SNIP>

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/25/poll.bush/index.html

[madeline_con]

50. News flash: He only won one....

when he became Gov.

But even that one was probably fixed!

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

51. Shrub Would Lose An Election If Held Last Year.....Assuming Legit. nt

[complain jane]

52. Bush "lost" an election in 2000 and 2004, too

But, y'know.

[wisteria]

53. Come on CNN/ Gallop, say it, the Democrat is John Kerry and

more people would vote for him than Bush if the election were held this year. Actually, Kerry probably won last year too. The margin of victory would just be wider this year, because the media is now reporting the truth.

[shance]

54. This is a distraction to gloss over the lie. The fix is in folks until we

get rid of the machines and the private companies who own the machines.

Its that simple.

[truthpusher]

55. Mood is sour on Bush, Congress (55% say - would vote for an unnamed Dem)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20051026/ts_usatoday/moodissouronbushcongress

Mood is sour on Bush, Congress
-------------
By Susan Page, USA TODAY
17 minutes ago
-------------
Americans are increasingly critical of President Bush and dissatisfied with the Republicans who have controlled Congress for a decade, a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll finds. (Related: Complete poll results)

But congressional Democrats - while favored when it comes to the economy, the war in Iraq and even taxes - have problems, too. They get a rating only somewhat less negative than the GOP. (Related: Americans give Democrats an edge)

The public's sour outlook raises the prospect that the elections next year could be more problematic for incumbents than any since Republicans swept to control of Congress in 1994.

"If a year from now the public mood is similar to what it is now, Republicans will be in trouble," says political scientist Gary Jacobson of the University of California, San Diego. He calls predictions of a Democratic takeover of the House "a bit premature, but not crazy."
(snip)

• Nearly four in 10 say they believe Bush aides broke the law in the leak of a CIA agent's name to reporters; another four in 10 say administration officials acted unethically but not illegally.

(snip)

• If Bush were running for re-election this year, 55% say they would vote for an unnamed Democratic candidate; 40% for Bush. Last year, Bush beat Democrat John Kerry 51%-48%.

complete story: http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20051026/ts_usatoday/moodissouronbushcongress

[vi5]

56. You know what? We saw this same "unnamed dem" thing...

...prior to the 2002 mid-terms and prior to the 2004 election. And it ended up meaning nothing. Yes, I know "Diebold....black box voting....paper trail, etc." But still the whole unnamed dem thing is a complete non-started when it comes to polls and elections I think.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

57. Means little cause Democrats viewed almost as negtively. Now's the chance

Must offer an attractive positive alternative. "Less terrible" is not good enough. Have to develop a strong upbeat platform and a stable of dynamic candidates.

[second edition]

58. Unnamed Democrat = John Kerry!

Now don't you think when asked this question, the Democrat that comes to most people's minds is Kerry? He ran either ahead or neck and neck with Bush through out the campaign and won all of the debates and even received a record number of Democratic votes.

[oioioi]

59. Probably the same 55% who voted for him in 2004.

.

[second edition]

61. Good point! n/t

[The Stranger]

62. Weren't they saying the same thing last year?

[second edition]

64. Nope, I don't recall a poll of this nature asking such a generic

question last year around this time. Why would they have done that? The election was right around the corner. It would have been the standard Kerry or Bush polls.

[The Stranger]

66. They were exit polls.

[antonialee839]

65. Not surprising considering * lost the last two also.

[zann725]

69. So let's have Election this year! Or at least a REAL recount of '04 vote

Prez. Kerry...your time has at last arrived. Oh how he must watch the current news coverage, and smile...politely...as the Karma wheel spins round and round.

[Lilith Velkor]

76. RICO, then recall n/t

[gauguin57]

70. He absolutely would "win" ... the way he "won" 2000 and 2004 ...

... by having the voting machines hacked, stacking the election boards and offices with his henchmen (and -women), disenfranchising African-American voters, having the rolls purged of legitimate voters, and stealing the goddamned election!

[leQ]

71. time for another war (eom)

[MissMillie]

72. CNN: Poll says Bush would lose an election held this year

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/25/poll.bush/index.html

On separate issues, a majority of those questioned felt the Democrats could do a better job than Republicans at handling health care (59 percent to 30 percent), Social Security (56 percent to 33 percent), gasoline prices (51 percent to 31 percent) and the economy (50 percent to 38 percent).

Finally.... people realize we're better at the economy.

We now need to get them to realize we're better on foreign policy too.

[Greeby]

73. No suprise

As he lost the one LAST year as well ;)

[liberal N proud]

74. Technically - He lost last year

If they would count all the votes.

[Career Prole]

82. Yup...this makes Douche Boosh 0 for 3

in presidential elections. :D

[twaddler01]

90. ...

:rofl:

[Puglover]

77. Oh just dandy

I'd like to personally thank each and every Bush voter for putting this insane murderer in office.

[BiggJawn]

78. Pity Il Douche's done with elections, isn't it?

Can I have a "No SHIT, Sherlock!"?

[0rganism]

79. Unfortunately invalid, since the preznit elections aren't by popular vote

To get a reasonably accurate picture, we'd need to do a 1000-person poll in each state, due to skew introduced by the electoral college system.

Dems winning on issue votes is nice to see, with the mid-term elections coming up. The GOP is going to need every penny of its 2-to-1 fundraising advantage to run enough attack ads, now that it's going to be challenged in formerly "safe" districts.

[gasperc]

80. wow, this is a stupid poll

that some lunkheads paid money to do this is all the more shocking

[schmuls]

85. No shit! He lost last time too. But he moved into the White House anyway

[against all enemies]

86. Really? What states would turn from red to blue?

[woo me with science]

87. You have isolated the most important question. nt

[robbedvoter]

88. CNN and kerry are the last ones to figure stuff out....

[twaddler01]

91. he lost before

I agree...besides the fact that this comes to us as no surprise especially at this point with him...

[EndElectoral]

93. exactly...and everyone knows it, and we can't even get it fully investigat

[barb162]

94. okay, let's hold an election this year