Bloomberg / LAT Poll: Kerry Would Defeat Bush in New U.S. Election

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

(Angus Reid Global Scan) – The outcome of the 2004 United States presidential election would be different if a new ballot took place this year, according to a poll by Bloomberg and the Los Angeles Times. 47 per cent of respondents would vote for Democrat John Kerry, while 40 per cent would support Republican George W. Bush.

In American elections, candidates require 270 votes in the U.S. Electoral College to win the White House. In November 2004, Bush earned a second term after securing 286 electoral votes from 31 states. Kerry received 252 electoral votes from 19 states and the District of Columbia. As far as the popular vote is concerned, Bush garnered 51.03 per cent of all cast ballots, with Kerry getting 48.04 per cent.

In a January 2005 interview with NBC’s Tim Russert, Kerry expressed satisfaction with his campaign, saying, "I won the youth vote. I won the independent vote. I won the moderate vote. If you take half the people at an Ohio State football game on Saturday afternoon and they were to have voted the other way, you and I would be having a discussion today about my State of the Union speech."

On Apr. 20, Kerry discussed the possibility of a presidential bid in 2008, saying, "I will make that decision before the end of the year but I’m thinking about it hard." The Massachusetts senator jokingly added, "If you can help me find 60,000 votes in Ohio."

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/11630

[flyarm]

1. HE BEAT HIM IN 2004!!...OF THAT I HAVE NO DOUBT! N/T

[awoke_in_2003]

10. No doubt

and we would have the same results today, thanks to good ole Diebold

[Ecumenist]

2. This is no shock....

He won the vote, (and the office), in november 2004. Anyone with an ounce of brains knows that and that's why you've had such a sea change in opinion.

[Eric J in MN]

3. "earned a second term"

or cheated his way to a second term through people like Republican Matt Damschroder (Ohio's Franklin County Board of Elections Director) witholding voting machines from black neighborhoods.

http://www.moveleft.com/moveleft_essay_2005_01_04_voting_rights_tuesday_the_2004_election_was_unconstitutional.asp

[liberal N proud]

4. But the bu$h regime would still steal the office.

[closeupready]

5. Kerry lost because he ran a bad campaign.

I like him and voted for him, and would vote for him again if he were the nominee in 2008, but honestly, that would probably just result in another loss for Dems because if Kerry couldn't win decisively against someone like Bush, then I don't think he would have a snowball's chance in heck against other more moderate Pukes. Just my humble opinion.

[Waya]

6. Kerry didn't lose....

...and nothing will convince me he did.....He won Ohio, for sure. Bush's fix just worked, with a lot of help from Kenneth Blackwell...:puke:

[closeupready]

7. In THAT sense, yes, I agree - Kerry SHOULD have won Ohio.

and thus the Presidency.

[terrya]

8. That's so...heartbreaking

Why the fuck didn't these people who now would have voted for Kerry have done so in 2004???

It's not like the signs weren't there 2 years ago. Bush is the very same man then as he is now.

John Kerry would have been a fine President. And John Edwards would have been a fine Vice President. It would have been leadership we would have been proud of.

[Stinky The Clown]

9. This matters not a whit

I agree that Kerry won in 04. I agree that if the election were today, he'd beat Ceaser Disgustus once again.

But yanno .... it doesn't matter.

What matters is "Will your local Dem candidate beat your local Repub candidate in the midterms?"

That's what matters.

Looking back, in many ways, is little more than spilled milk tears or mental masturbation. 04 happened. You're mad. I'm mad. But it happened. The best we can do is to learn from it.

And fight. Like we've never fought before.