Presidential Debate: Round 2

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Already? Damn time zones, I'm so not getting sleep on Friday night here. This 'un had better be less sleep-inducing than the Veep one.

― Girolamo Savonarola, Thursday, 7 October 2004 08:46 (twenty-one years ago)

Come anticipate Kill Bush with me.

― Momus (Momus), Thursday, 7 October 2004 12:31 (twenty-one years ago)

(That should of course read 'Come anticipate Kill Bush 2 with me'.)

― Momus (Momus), Thursday, 7 October 2004 12:34 (twenty-one years ago)

My dear friend is getting married Fri. - 5;30 ceremony, 7:00 reception. The reception is swank, and I will be eating filet mignon, but I have to admit I'm sorta miffed that I have to miss the debate. Maybe it will be on in the lounge outside the reception hall. Is this absurd,to actually consider leaving a wedding reception to watch the debate?
Brooks from NYT said last night that, if Kerry wins this one, he wins the election.

― aimurchie, Thursday, 7 October 2004 13:03 (twenty-one years ago)

I anticipate (that is, expect) that Dubya will say bad things and be cheered by bad people, and after if is over, more bad people will say that he is a great success and back on track for a resounding victory. Kerry will say some good things and get encouragement from some good people. But overall, irresponsible, foolish and bad people will conclude that Dubya is great and everyone likes him, and thus help to hasten the victory of very bad people, notably Dubya.

― the bellefox, Thursday, 7 October 2004 13:07 (twenty-one years ago)

I will have to listen on the radio because of Friday night traffic, unless I can find a place to watch it in LA.

― youn, Thursday, 7 October 2004 13:22 (twenty-one years ago)

there's no doubt in my mind that Bush will "win" this debate. The town hall style will put his folksy, glad-handling skills front and center.

― Gold Teeth II (kenan), Thursday, 7 October 2004 14:16 (twenty-one years ago)

But still he'll have nothing to say. Hopefully, Kerry will come across as more personable in the more "folksy" setting.

― dave225 (Dave225), Thursday, 7 October 2004 14:25 (twenty-one years ago)

No way.

― Gold Teeth II (kenan), Thursday, 7 October 2004 14:30 (twenty-one years ago)

I think you are underestimating how badly Bush seems to handle unscripted questions.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 7 October 2004 14:32 (twenty-one years ago)

I think you might in turn overestimate how 'unscripted' the questions and audience members will be!

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 7 October 2004 14:33 (twenty-one years ago)

Haha you think? I'm not so sure that sort of thing can be that controlled.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 7 October 2004 14:34 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, what kind of screening procedure is this audience going to go through in the first place? Or are there any?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 7 October 2004 14:36 (twenty-one years ago)

IS there any, I should say.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 7 October 2004 14:36 (twenty-one years ago)

If it's all paid undecided voting actors whose spontaneous questions will be written on que cards, I'll be very disappointed.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 7 October 2004 14:38 (twenty-one years ago)

Ned -- extensive. The audience is screened, the questions are screened, and lately even the moderators are screned.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-09-22-debates-rules_x.htm

― Gold Teeth II (kenan), Thursday, 7 October 2004 14:38 (twenty-one years ago)

I mean you guys ARGUED and ARGUED and these ended up being the terms of the debate?!?!?

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 7 October 2004 14:38 (twenty-one years ago)

Didn't Gibson say he wasn't signing anything?

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 7 October 2004 14:40 (twenty-one years ago)

As long as Kerry keeps attacking Bush when he's answering questions it'll keep Bush off-script. The questions are known in advance, but candidate responses are not. If Kerry keeps swinging with every question, Bush might keep taking the bait. Kerry has much more ammo.

(xpost)

― Dale Panopticalis (cprek), Thursday, 7 October 2004 14:40 (twenty-one years ago)

Im really impressed with the way the Kerry campaign has been running ever since the debate. Theyve held BC04's feet to the fire constantly and I really like their 'bush is out of touch' theme that theyre pushing, because it works like gangbusters. Its pretty funny how it is that the Kerry camp brings in the Clinton people, and theyre turning to the themes that busted the other Bush back in 92.

― still bevens (bscrubbins), Thursday, 7 October 2004 15:53 (twenty-one years ago)

Frank Rich talks debates; kicks ass.

― Yanc3y (ystrickler), Thursday, 7 October 2004 15:59 (twenty-one years ago)

The questions are known in advance, but candidate responses are not.

the questions are known in advance???? I thought I read just the opposite! that is bullshit.

― kyle (akmonday), Thursday, 7 October 2004 16:03 (twenty-one years ago)

The opposite??? What, that the answers are known in advance but not the questions? Hmmm. Could be entertaining.

― Michael White (Hereward), Thursday, 7 October 2004 16:11 (twenty-one years ago)

you are a PEDANT Mr. San Francisco!

I meant that I thought the questions were unknown.

― kyle (akmonday), Thursday, 7 October 2004 16:21 (twenty-one years ago)

My prediction comes true - Kerry hits 50% in new AP poll

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Thursday, 7 October 2004 16:22 (twenty-one years ago)

The opposite??? What, that the answers are known in advance but not the questions? Hmmm. Could be entertaining.

"Mr. President, is it true that you dangle loogies over your aides in between pounding beers and openly scratching your dangling nutsack?"

"Well, let me step back and review my thinking prior to going into Iraq. First, the lesson of September the 11th is, when this nation sees a threat, a gathering threat, we've got to deal with it. We can no longer hope that oceans protect us from harm. Every threat we must take seriously."

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 7 October 2004 16:23 (twenty-one years ago)

can we have a moratorium on the use of 'folksy' when describing either candidate please?

― mark p (Mark P), Thursday, 7 October 2004 16:24 (twenty-one years ago)

George W. Bush is Bob Roberts.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 7 October 2004 16:26 (twenty-one years ago)

Ned, ROFFLE.

Kyle, Sorry. Just trying to make funny.

― Michael White (Hereward), Thursday, 7 October 2004 16:32 (twenty-one years ago)

Honestly with more and more people (especially younger folks) completely eschewing the landline for unlisted wireless service as their only telephone, can anybody imagine that phone polling is accurate? I think I only have one friend with a landline left. Not even my family has a regular phone anymore. I used this fact last night to make the point that Kerry has a huge mobilized base that nobody even knows about and that the record voter registration numbers are all in support of him (or really, support of whoever is running against that fucker and his fucker friends).

― TOMBOT, Thursday, 7 October 2004 16:50 (twenty-one years ago)

That's a good point. When they talk about "likely" voters, are they still using the criterion of someone who has voted in the past? Since the number of new registered voters this years is unprecedented in recent memory, are any of the pollsters trying to forecast what kind of an effect this is going to have, even allowing for the fact that not all of them are going to make it to the polls?

― o. nate (onate), Thursday, 7 October 2004 16:56 (twenty-one years ago)

you are so right, tom. also, it is probably fair to say that more of the people who are willing to take the time to talk to pollsters on the phone are likely to be older retirees. nobody calls their grandparents enough, and they get lonely!

― Emilymv (Emilymv), Thursday, 7 October 2004 16:58 (twenty-one years ago)

Tom, I've been arguing the same point over the past month along with other polling discrepancies. Kerry's election day victory will take the media by complete suprise and be known as the November Knockout.

― Dale Panopticalis (cprek), Thursday, 7 October 2004 17:14 (twenty-one years ago)

My gut feeling is that you're right, Dale. Remember: Gore won in 2000, and he didn't have half the stuff going in his favor that Kerry does now. Not even personality, astonishingly enough.

― Gold Teeth II (kenan), Thursday, 7 October 2004 17:19 (twenty-one years ago)

I hope Dubya's handlers have taught him a few more patient facial expressions. Wait, no I don't.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 7 October 2004 17:19 (twenty-one years ago)

TEH AUTUMN ANNIHILATION!!!!!!!!!!

― Emilymv (Emilymv), Thursday, 7 October 2004 17:23 (twenty-one years ago)

The polling numbers are inaccurate and skewed to the right, certainly. Good. The close poll numbers, along with the insistence that this is a HUGE election (which it is) will keep people from not voting out of apathy.

― Gold Teeth II (kenan), Thursday, 7 October 2004 17:25 (twenty-one years ago)

You guys are going to carry Kentucky, right? Josh said he was gonna vote in VA because he has more of a chance of making a difference there. He thinks. I live in DC, my trip to the polls is mostly symbolic, like HERE'S SOME EXTRA FUCK YOU TO GO WITH THAT FUCK YOU, ASSHOLES, GET OUT OF MY TOWN.

I did hear that the Kerry campaign workers in KY decided to go work Ohio though.

― TOMBOT, Thursday, 7 October 2004 17:50 (twenty-one years ago)

It is nice to see Kerry backers being positive and optimistic.

I have a land line. So did many folk I know. But I don't think mine is 'listed' - perhaps that is key in what is being said.

I don't have a mobile phone. Do pollsters call mobile phones?

I enjoyed Gabneb's link saying that Kerry was doing well.

I agree that people should not call W. 'folksy', when in fact he is vicious and bad.

― the bellefox, Thursday, 7 October 2004 17:55 (twenty-one years ago)

Kerry campaign workers in KY

Ew.

― Dan Perry '08 (Dan Perry), Thursday, 7 October 2004 17:55 (twenty-one years ago)

Bush and Kerry don't know what the questions will be.

― You've Got to Pick Up Every Stitch (tracerhand), Thursday, 7 October 2004 17:58 (twenty-one years ago)

An unscientific bumper sticker poll shows that Kerry is certainly favored in Lexington. We're probably going to Bush, but we might be suprised by the Eastern Kentucky die-hard conservative dixiecrat Dems: The little old ladies whose families have always voted Dem. "I just go in there and pull the Dem lever. And that's all I'll ever do, screw those damn republican yankees."

― Dale Panopticalis (cprek), Thursday, 7 October 2004 17:59 (twenty-one years ago)

I agree that people should not call W. 'folksy', when in fact he is vicious and bad.

By now, I think of folksy as an insult. Reagan changed the meaning forever.

― Gold Teeth II (kenan), Thursday, 7 October 2004 18:00 (twenty-one years ago)

KY is a an extremely "red" state. The county that we live in (fayette) may go kerry though, and they are expecting about 70% voter turnout. but i highly doubt a win here is possible.

― Emilymv (Emilymv), Thursday, 7 October 2004 18:01 (twenty-one years ago)

substitute 'reagan' for 'four tet' and you are otm (xpost)

― mark p (Mark P), Thursday, 7 October 2004 18:01 (twenty-one years ago)

With Kentucky, the majority of the Bush votes will more than likely come from Xtian fundies making sure no mens will be marrying no box turtles like that Massachusettes friend-of-the-"gays" would have things, and, judging by the support shown statewide for the marriage-will-only-be-between-a-man-and-woman constitutional amendment on the block in November, that might be just a large enough number of votes to worry about.

xpost with my friend emily who some guy once assumed was a republican because her t-shirt had an elephant on it or something

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 7 October 2004 18:04 (twenty-one years ago)

i really had a craving for the taste of his blood, nick.

― Emilymv (Emilymv), Thursday, 7 October 2004 18:06 (twenty-one years ago)

I think that was that same guy who asked Nancy if she had "hit that" with regards to gay-ass Greg. "Brooke" ha ha.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 7 October 2004 18:08 (twenty-one years ago)

you are so right, it was! he was a real charmer, alright.

― Emilymv (Emilymv), Thursday, 7 October 2004 18:09 (twenty-one years ago)

KY is a an extremely "red" state

There's no way Kerry will win it (probably in the low 40%s), but, and while it's the Southern exception, it's worth noting that there are more registered Democrats in the state than Republicans.

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Thursday, 7 October 2004 18:21 (twenty-one years ago)

Skipping 682 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

bush mentioning blair = a dubious attempt at credibility by association.
kerry not mentioning blair = inconsequential. (imho)

i really doubt that blair is "dead meat". quite the contrary actually...

― wank sinatra (disco stu), Saturday, 9 October 2004 13:47 (twenty-one years ago)

loyalty/camaraderie (in good times and bad) counts for a lot.

― wank sinatra (disco stu), Saturday, 9 October 2004 13:49 (twenty-one years ago)

current foxnews.com poll results: 53%/46%, advantage bush. no surprise there, except that it's almost 50/50.

scroll way way down for the poll.

― Germany's Fun-Loving Beer (Jody Beth Rosen), Saturday, 9 October 2004 15:20 (twenty-one years ago)

what about when bush nearly ATE the moderator in his hurry to defend himself against kerry? i thought they were actually going to come to blows - it looked like bush might leap over the table and tell him to stuff it.
i thought kerry did remarkably well in this debate - i liked what he said more yesterday than in the first one. this was the first time i'd felt like, 'yeah, actually i WANT this guy to be president,' rather than, 'ok, best we've got.'

― stolenbus (stolenbus), Saturday, 9 October 2004 15:50 (twenty-one years ago)

my favorite part of the night was all of the scowling missourians. esp this one woman who would always be making this god awful face everytime bush spoke. makes me wish i had tv capture on my pc.

― still bevens (bscrubbins), Saturday, 9 October 2004 17:18 (twenty-one years ago)

holy shit! nobody watched last night:

FRIDAY NIGHT DEBATE NUMBERS WEAK FOR BIG-3 NETS: NBC averaged a 7.4 rating/13 share, ABC 6.0/10; CBS third at 4.9/8... Developing...

― still bevens (bscrubbins), Saturday, 9 October 2004 17:21 (twenty-one years ago)

why does bush keep bringing up the "wrong war, wrong time, wrong place" line? it's kinda catchy and not the thing you'd think he'd want to stick in people's heads

― s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 9 October 2004 17:54 (twenty-one years ago)

Hell, of course no one watched. It was Friday night!

― Pleasant Plains (Pleasant Plains), Saturday, 9 October 2004 17:56 (twenty-one years ago)

I think the Town Hall format sucks. It's basically people asking the very same questions a moderator would but less pointedly and intelligently. There should also be a rule against a) speaking on a previous question after your turn and/or rebuttal is over in an attempt to get 'the last word' and b) repeating your talking points 15 times.

I also liked how Bush said "you can run but you can't hide". I could almost hear Osama laughing from his cave.

― bnw (bnw), Saturday, 9 October 2004 18:03 (twenty-one years ago)

Thanks for linking to the needsumwood.com site. My computer doesn't have enough spyware on it. I was needing some more.

― Garbo, Saturday, 9 October 2004 18:13 (twenty-one years ago)

You mean the woman on the end of the row who was leaning against the railing and picking her teeth half the night?

― David Beckhouse (David Beckhouse), Saturday, 9 October 2004 22:40 (twenty-one years ago)

You sure it was her teeth that she was picking?

― Pleasant Plains (Pleasant Plains), Saturday, 9 October 2004 23:00 (twenty-one years ago)

bush's new talking point is kerry's "dour pessimism". i wish i was there when they explained to bush what "dour" means.

― dan (dan), Saturday, 9 October 2004 23:32 (twenty-one years ago)

http://www.youforgotpoland.com/bush-debate.gif

― Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Sunday, 10 October 2004 01:37 (twenty-one years ago)

The point at which I believe I laughed the hardest during this whole thing was when, about five seconds into a Kerry rebuttal, Dubya was OUT OF HIS SEAT, inching forward, like an MC at a mic battle with a HUNGER. My house is a mess of beer bottles and broken American dreams today.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Sunday, 10 October 2004 01:49 (twenty-one years ago)

I think the Town Hall format sucks. It's basically people asking the very same questions a moderator would but less pointedly and intelligently.

I disagree, the questions were much better than anything Jim Lehrer or Gwen Ifill could come up with. I'm holding out hope that Bob Scheiffer's better.

― hstencil (hstencil), Sunday, 10 October 2004 02:11 (twenty-one years ago)

It is clear, after all, that most of the US does not see things as you, here, do: or Kerry would be leading by 95%.
OT: Travelled through Amish country today, and saw an alarmingly high number of "Bush/Cheney '04" signs, both on lawns and on billboards.
On the flipside, I also saw one bumper sticker, and it said: "Like Father, Like Son....ONE TERM!"
So that cheered me up by 1%*

*(Disclaimer: after the electoral votes are counted this 1% will have been rendered nonexistant.)

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Sunday, 10 October 2004 02:14 (twenty-one years ago)

One good thing about the town hall format was that lots of the questions were of the direct, point blank, hold leaders accountable variety. A moderator can't use that form of address.

― youn, Sunday, 10 October 2004 02:22 (twenty-one years ago)

Some clarity on Bush's apparently none-too-veiled reference to tearing down Roe v. Wade:

http://fairshot.typepad.com/fairshot/2004/10/dred_scott_roe_.html

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Sunday, 10 October 2004 21:13 (twenty-one years ago)

Some clarity on Bush's apparently none-too-veiled reference about the Dred Scott decision to tearing down Roe v. Wade:

http://fairshot.typepad.com/fairshot/2004/10/dred_scott_roe_.html

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Sunday, 10 October 2004 21:13 (twenty-one years ago)

Woops.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Sunday, 10 October 2004 21:14 (twenty-one years ago)

Okay, fair enough, but who among the non Bush faithful will be able to decode that?

― Girolamo Savonarola, Sunday, 10 October 2004 22:24 (twenty-one years ago)

The non-crazed anti-choicers are just supposed to write it off as another Bush malapropism. For those anti-choicers though, it's basically the ultimate reassurance.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Sunday, 10 October 2004 22:42 (twenty-one years ago)

I caught this in a bar. Sound was off but with close captioning it was clear Bush got smoked. In fact, I've got it on tape to watch eventuallyand I have to imagine Bush could ONLY come off worse with sound (I missed any possible stutters and the crickets his bad jokes got). I'm glad I finally got to see one of these.

― manthony m1cc1o (Anthony Miccio), Sunday, 10 October 2004 23:02 (twenty-one years ago)

Anthony, you missed the best part of the debate!!!

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Sunday, 10 October 2004 23:11 (twenty-one years ago)

Seriously, Bush's shouted iambs were hypnotizing; it's like he had a hearing problem or something

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Sunday, 10 October 2004 23:12 (twenty-one years ago)

(haha I wrote that completely forgetting about the "Bush = wired" rumor)

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Sunday, 10 October 2004 23:13 (twenty-one years ago)

I dunno, it was interesting to read what was being said. Even from just the visuals and text I could tell that Kerry was creating a context of consensus and power by name-dropping folks who agreed with him and confidently pointing out the mistakes Bush has made. I know it probably sounded better, but it also READ better. You can say all politicians are conning us, but at the very least Kerry did it in a manner that actually acknowledged and paid attention to the qualms and concerns of people. Text-wise alone, where the outrage Kerry voiced was firm and based on clear-voiced reason, Bush only offered defensive incredulity. Kerry responded to the dare to look in the camera and make a promise re: taxes quickly and with assuredness. Bush responded to the demand for three examples of mistakes with evasiveness and near-incoherency. While I'm fine with people being bothered by the "beauty pageant" element of this election and those who find too much fault in both candidates to vote for either (by voting for a third party candidate they'll at least be increasing the size of the voter pool), I'll definitely take offense at somebody who says Kerry came off "no better" than Bush. That's just contrarian and silly.

I've said this before, but I wish people would stop hypothesizing what "mainstream america" is going to do. None of us here are Kreskins and excessive pessimissism and optimism isn't helpful (both dwindle people's feeling that their individual vote matters). It's clear that Kerry is the better of the two main candidates and I plan to act on that and express my belief, whatever the rest of America decides to do.

― manthony m1cc1o (Anthony Miccio), Sunday, 10 October 2004 23:30 (twenty-one years ago)

have we already mentioned this Sullivan (deadpanned?) line:

Bush promised at one point that he'd be more "facile" in future. That's going to be a hard promise to keep.

― Sir Kingfish Beavis D'Azzmonch (Kingfish), Sunday, 10 October 2004 23:41 (twenty-one years ago)

It's already been said but Bush's wariness about this "internets" thing and his inability to move past Dred Scott re: his feelings on civil rights reminds me of his daddy's need to bring up the "crazy bozo ozone man" and pointing out that Clinton's off partying with rock stars like U2. Shit, even Dole came off more easygoing about this stuff in '96 (he shouted out to his dot com).

― manthony m1cc1o (Anthony Miccio), Sunday, 10 October 2004 23:45 (twenty-one years ago)

I remember some comment from Bush Senior complaining about MTV in 1992 as some sort of 'mod' channel. Good job, dude.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Sunday, 10 October 2004 23:47 (twenty-one years ago)

I think he also referenced Boy George when discussing Bill and Bono's rendevous.

― manthony m1cc1o (Anthony Miccio), Sunday, 10 October 2004 23:48 (twenty-one years ago)

all pessimissism/optimism aside i'm finding the figures regarding the electoral votes strangely fascinating.
the Kreskin part is, well, suggesting that it's not going to be close either way.
but say if it is close, then betting-type analysis such as this (from realclearpolitics): "The quartet of Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa and New Mexico could be where this election is decided. If Bush does have a hold on Wisconsin, then even if Senator Kerry wins Ohio, he will also have to win both Iowa and New Mexico to deny Bush four more years" might prove esp. prescient.
(this also supposes kerry gets PA, and bush FL. if either fails in those respective regards no real race left)

― duke electoral, Sunday, 10 October 2004 23:52 (twenty-one years ago)

There's still plenty of time left in this race, one debate as well. In 2000, the lead kept on switching hands in the last few weeks. I have no doubt that several states will flip between then and now.

― Girolamo Savonarola, Monday, 11 October 2004 00:24 (twenty-one years ago)

That Ohio! Such a flip-flopper!

― Pleasant Plains (Pleasant Plains), Monday, 11 October 2004 01:33 (twenty-one years ago)

Who else thinks there is a good (or at least not bad) chance that Bush wins again with a slim majority of the electoral college, but despite an even greater minority (compared to '00) of the popular vote? I think Kerry has a very, very good chance of winning, especially if all the new folks registering to vote actually do vote. But the skewed lose/win scenario still seems highly plausible to me.

Oh, also, sorta x-post: do the Amish typically vote? Large numbers? Small numbers? They certainly don't watch the debates. Do they even read newspapers? Are they pacifist, like Quakers? Just wondering.

― Josh in Chicago (Josh in Chicago), Monday, 11 October 2004 02:37 (twenty-one years ago)

Typically the Amish don't vote.

― hstencil (hstencil), Monday, 11 October 2004 02:42 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, without televisions, they defintely didn't see how bad Bush got hammered in the debate.

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Monday, 11 October 2004 04:11 (twenty-one years ago)

God is their television.

― Momus (Momus), Monday, 11 October 2004 05:13 (twenty-one years ago)

"The quartet of Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa and New Mexico could be where this election is decided. If Bush does have a hold on Wisconsin, then even if Senator Kerry wins Ohio, he will also have to win both Iowa and New Mexico to deny Bush four more years"

This is true, though even Rasmussen (which is steadfastly not reflecting the Kerry bounce other pollsters are getting excited about) shows NH going to K-E; this plus OH and, say, NV (which is a Bush 2000 state every bit as close as Gore 2000 states like IA and NM) would do it, losing WI. Zogby is far more positive about this for Kerry and has him comfortably holding every Gore state with sub-margin-of-error Dem leads in five of the Rep marginals.

― Michael Jones (MichaelJ), Monday, 11 October 2004 05:40 (twenty-one years ago)

I think the reverse is possible too - Bush seems to have made heavy inroads into traditionally Democrat areas on the eastern seaboard (NY, NJ and MD being closer than usual) but they're states he is unlikely to win. This coupled with his usual 60+ support in certain mid-western states means he may carry the popular vote by as much as a point and a half but still lose: Kerry sneaking home in OH plus two of (NH, NM, NV, IA).

(I'm pulling these numbers out of my Limey backside - can more knowledgable people set me straight if I'm wrong?)

― Michael Jones (MichaelJ), Monday, 11 October 2004 05:46 (twenty-one years ago)

Momus on Blair, and Carsmile on flip-flops, are both very good.

― the bellefox, Monday, 11 October 2004 11:55 (twenty-one years ago)

If Bush does have a hold on Wisconsin, then even if Senator Kerry wins Ohio, he will also have to win both Iowa and New Mexico to deny Bush four more years"

Real Clear Politics' "analysis" is through conservative-colored lenses. Here's my liberal translation: If Bush does have a hold on [an unpredictable tossup state that has not voted Republican for years], then even if Senator Kerry wins [an extremely unpredictable ground-game tossup state with the worst economy in the nation], he will also have to win both [an anti-war state that goes between tossup and leaning his way] and [a majority-Hispanic state where his polling lead is regularly in the high single digits] to deny Bush four more years"

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Monday, 11 October 2004 12:25 (twenty-one years ago)

actually, this is much easier to parse - If Bush does have a hold on Wisconsin, then "even if 'Senator Kerry' wins Ohio," he wins.

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Monday, 11 October 2004 12:29 (twenty-one years ago)

who is courting the amish vote?

― Emilymv (Emilymv), Monday, 11 October 2004 14:23 (twenty-one years ago)

http://newsbox.msn.co.uk/article.aspx?as=article&f=uk_-_olgbtopnews&t=11881&id=238350&d=20041011&do=http://newsbox.msn.co.uk&i=http://newsbox.msn.co.uk/mediaexportlive&ks=0&mc=5&lc=en&ae=windows-1252

I wonder which are the right and wrong directions that America is headed in. East and West?

― the bluefox, Monday, 11 October 2004 15:49 (twenty-one years ago)

God is their television.
Question is...do they get better 'reception' than we do?

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Monday, 11 October 2004 18:11 (twenty-one years ago)

they get immaculate reception.

― Emilymv (Emilymv), Monday, 11 October 2004 18:16 (twenty-one years ago)

Ahhhh. It's the wide-brimmed hats. They're like the Old Skool version of Dish Network, yes?

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Monday, 11 October 2004 18:21 (twenty-one years ago)

a review/comparision of the post-debate fact-check pieces done by the New York Times and the Washington Post.

The WaPo one is better, as it actually calls either guy on bullshit.

― Sir Kingfish Beavis D'Azzmonch (Kingfish), Monday, 11 October 2004 19:09 (twenty-one years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.