Guess who's ahead of Bush now

[normalnoises]

Kerry tops all Dems and leads Bush by 8 points, nationwide poll by Quinnipiac University finds; President’s approval below 50 percent for first time

Feb. 2, 2004

In a nationwide survey, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry now leads President George W. Bush 51 – 43 percent according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today. Looking at the Democratic primary, the Kerry juggernaut has rolled up 42 percent, 30 points higher than any other Presidential primary contender.

American voters give President Bush a 48 – 45 percent approval, the first time he has dropped below 50 percent. While Kerry is the only Democrat ahead of Bush, all Democratic contenders have gained ground on the President.

Kerry had 30 percent of Democratic primary voters in a pre-New Hampshire January 26 national poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University.

In this latest survey, Kerry gets 42 percent of Democrats to Howard Dean’s 11 percent, followed by North Carolina Sen. John Edwards and former Gen. Wesley Clark with 10 percent each and Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman with 6 percent. No other candidate tops 5 percent, with 14 percent undecided.

"Talk about bounce. Sen. Kerry’s on a trampoline that has him soaring past the other Democrats and even past President Bush. What bounces up, can bounce down and the question is whether Kerry can stay on up and turn some of those Republican red states into Democratic blue in November," said Maurice Carroll, director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

Read more

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x10002.xml

[djprotege]

Dennis Kuchinich?!!?!? Whoo-Hoo! oh wait...all the people who were praising him have disappeared. Haha...

Anyone who thinks Kerry has a shot at beating Bush is caught up in the moment my opinion. The only democrat who would be able to carry the electoral votes to compete with Bush is Edwards. Why you ask? Think I'm stupid for saying so...here's the method to my madness.

Everyone knows that when it comes to democrats vs. republicans...its the states with the big city, welfare voters (not saying that in a deragatory way) like New York, California, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and any other state who's majority of big citys votes go for the democratic welfare supporters........against the southern and smaller states who vote conservative for the republicans. Now once in a while you'll see an exception, but when it comes to presidentail votes...its always the northern and big city states voting democrat against the south, midwest, and states without the big populated cities. The democratic candidate would win less states, but would win the states that have big electoral #s such as NY, NJ, PA, CA, Michigan, and so on...thats a proven fact of history. The republican will win more actual states than the democrat....so the southern states will be the deciding factor...which is why I say Edwards would be the only democrat that could beat Bush. He could win a few of the Southern states that are typically republican states, such as North & South Carolina and Virginia & W. Viriginia. Look at the last election...it went as expected. Gore winning the big electoral vote states like NY, PA, Michigan, and so on. He didnt cary as many overal states, but won the big electoral voted states. Bush however won the majority of the southern and midwestern states. Gore would have won if he won his own home state in the south, Tennessee.

Kerry will carry all those typical democratic NE states, but has no chance at winning a southern state. An Edwards vs. Bush election would mean Edwards carrying the typical democratic states plus SC and maybe even NC and a couple other southern states that the republicans are usually set on winning.

I'm a diehard republican and will be voting for Bush...but my opnion says if the democrats want to beat Bush in an electoral election, they have to put Edwards against him.

[mysterynyc]

guess who was kicking ass up until 2 weeks prior to Iowa...HOWARD DEAN.

we got a loooong ways to go.