ARG uber-poll shows presidential dead heat - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Scipio · 09-22-2004, 04:23 PM

http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/

Quote:

How close is the race for president?

* George W. Bush is at 47% and John Kerry is at 46% in the weighted national popular vote.
* Bush leads outside the margin of error in 17 states with 133 electoral votes.
* Kerry leads outside the margin of error in 10 states with 132 electoral votes.
* Bush has any lead in 29 states with 253 electoral votes.
* Kerry has any lead in 20 states with 270 electoral votes.
* Bush and Kerry are tied in Wisconsin and West Virginia.
* Bush needs to defend small leads in 5 states - Colorado, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and Ohio.
* Kerry needs to defend small leads in 5 states - Maine, Florida, Minnesota, Oregon, and Pennsylvania.
* Among men nationwide, 51% say they would vote for Bush and 42% say they would vote for Kerry.
* Among women nationwide, 42% say they would vote for Bush and 50% say they would vote for Kerry.

600 completed telephone interviews among likely voters
in each state and DC on dates in September (Sep).

If you do the math, that means that over 30,000 people were polled. I submit it without comment.

DelayedReaction · 09-22-2004, 06:15 PM

I wonder if those votes are specifically for Nader, or for the Libertarian party? I know I sure as hell will be voting for Badnarik*. After reading the question they asked, I really wish they had incorporated him into this.

I'm really looking forward to the debates.

*Yeah yeah, I know, a vote for a third party is a vote for Bush. You don't live in the People's Republic of Maryland, which is about as democratic as you can get.

Mephisto2 · 09-22-2004, 07:01 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I knew the so-called DEBATES in the US Presidential elections are no such thing.

I read that

A) The candidates know the questions beforehand
B) That their handlers can (and regularly do) veto certain questions
C) The candidates therefore can "practice" their response
D) Therefore there is NO real debate, but just parroting of prepared statements.

I really can't understand that. What's the point? What's there to look forward to.

Mr Mephisto

[This is a non-partisan accusation. Both sides are guilty of this nonesense, as far as I can tell]

DelayedReaction · 09-22-2004, 08:48 PM

Well, at the very least it gives me a chance to see each candidate live. Believe me, I would much rather prefer an actual "debate" where the candidates are forced to think and react to one another's statements. Unfortunately this is not the case, and I'm taking the best of what I can get.

Zeld2.0 · 09-22-2004, 10:01 PM

Yeah I think most people would liek to see actual "debate" but at the risk that it either turns out really stupid for one side or it gets too serious and nothing is answered, debates more or less are "show and tell"

guthmund · 09-22-2004, 10:32 PM

Absolutely and it's really a shame.

I think debates should be a mandatory part of the race. I don't think the candidate's should get advance notice of anything. In fact, the only thing required of the candidate is an appearance. If they really want to come off well do the fucking homework and prove you're the best man for job. I want a parrot; I buy a parrot. I really can't see how anyone will be able to come away with these sham debates with anything but a bad taste in their mouths.

I saw a list of the "requirements" that both candidates agreed to...can't directly ask questions of the opposition unless it's asked rhetorically, the camera isn't allowed to shift to the candidate not answering the question, no use of props or anything that makes one man look taller than the other....?!?!

If your vote is determined by which man used his props more effectively or which man looked taller....well, this country is in a sad state of affairs.

I don't expect anything out of this debate other than the regurgitation and recitation of bits and pieces of the stump speeches we've already heard. The personable President regaling us with folksy homilies and platitudes and trying to convince us he's everyman and Sen. Kerry...well, doing the exact same thing with healthy doses of "this President is wrong, wrong, wrong."

I think the poll is absolutely right in declaring the race a dead heat. Not because the country is so divided, but rather the two candidates have done very little to distinguish themselves from each other. What I can't decide is if it's on purpose or not.
With very little differences to see between the two candidates, it basically boils down to who would you like to go have a beer with and that's a role President Bush plays up rather well.

09-22-2004, 06:15 PM	#2 (permalink)
DelayedReaction BFG Builder Location: University of Maryland	I wonder if those votes are specifically for Nader, or for the Libertarian party? I know I sure as hell will be voting for Badnarik. After reading the question they asked, I really wish they had incorporated him into this. I'm really looking forward to the debates. Yeah yeah, I know, a vote for a third party is a vote for Bush. You don't live in the People's Republic of Maryland, which is about as democratic as you can get. __________________ If ignorance is bliss, you must be having an orgasm.

09-22-2004, 08:48 PM	#4 (permalink)
DelayedReaction BFG Builder Location: University of Maryland	Well, at the very least it gives me a chance to see each candidate live. Believe me, I would much rather prefer an actual "debate" where the candidates are forced to think and react to one another's statements. Unfortunately this is not the case, and I'm taking the best of what I can get. __________________ If ignorance is bliss, you must be having an orgasm.

09-22-2004, 10:32 PM	#6 (permalink)
guthmund big damn hero	Absolutely and it's really a shame. I think debates should be a mandatory part of the race. I don't think the candidate's should get advance notice of anything. In fact, the only thing required of the candidate is an appearance. If they really want to come off well do the fucking homework and prove you're the best man for job. I want a parrot; I buy a parrot. I really can't see how anyone will be able to come away with these sham debates with anything but a bad taste in their mouths. I saw a list of the "requirements" that both candidates agreed to...can't directly ask questions of the opposition unless it's asked rhetorically, the camera isn't allowed to shift to the candidate not answering the question, no use of props or anything that makes one man look taller than the other....?!?! If your vote is determined by which man used his props more effectively or which man looked taller....well, this country is in a sad state of affairs. I don't expect anything out of this debate other than the regurgitation and recitation of bits and pieces of the stump speeches we've already heard. The personable President regaling us with folksy homilies and platitudes and trying to convince us he's everyman and Sen. Kerry...well, doing the exact same thing with healthy doses of "this President is wrong, wrong, wrong." I think the poll is absolutely right in declaring the race a dead heat. Not because the country is so divided, but rather the two candidates have done very little to distinguish themselves from each other. What I can't decide is if it's on purpose or not. With very little differences to see between the two candidates, it basically boils down to who would you like to go have a beer with and that's a role President Bush plays up rather well. __________________ No signature. None. Seriously.

09-22-2004, 07:01 PM	#3 (permalink)
Mephisto2 Junkie	Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I knew the so-called DEBATES in the US Presidential elections are no such thing. I read that A) The candidates know the questions beforehand B) That their handlers can (and regularly do) veto certain questions C) The candidates therefore can "practice" their response D) Therefore there is NO real debate, but just parroting of prepared statements. I really can't understand that. What's the point? What's there to look forward to. Mr Mephisto [This is a non-partisan accusation. Both sides are guilty of this nonesense, as far as I can tell]

09-22-2004, 10:01 PM	#5 (permalink)
Zeld2.0 Cherry-pickin' devil's advocate Location: Los Angeles	Yeah I think most people would liek to see actual "debate" but at the risk that it either turns out really stupid for one side or it gets too serious and nothing is answered, debates more or less are "show and tell"