"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Bert Robbins wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

NOYB wrote:


Zogby is an Arab-American. He may be a wee bit biased, no?


"thunder" wrote in message
news

On Wed, 12 May 2004 19:05:42 +0000, NOYB wrote:



Perhaps America's long nightmare with G.W. Bush is coming to an end.

Perhaps not:

CNN/USA Today/Gallup
Bush 47, Kerry 45, Nader 5, None/No opinion 3

Investors Business Daily/Christian Science Monitor Bush 46, Kerry 41,
Nader 5, Not sure 7

Perhaps:

http://www.zogby.com/news/051004.html




Sheesh. Zogby is an honest pollster, an interesting fellow, and
Republican-leaning. No one questions his integrity...no one except a
BushLemming like you.


Zogby has gone from the darling of the polling industry to being nothing
more than a Democratic schill. He used to be able to predict the numbers
but, his political bias towards the left has clouded his judgement in
the
last six years.



Oh, sure...Bert...right...as if you would have a clue.

I bought a clue last week and I still have it in my pocket.

Zogby was the undisputed pollmaster of the 90's, however, since the 2000
election Zogby hasn't been doing too well. Now I believe the best pollsters
are The Battleground group.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

Zogby is an Arab-American. He may be a wee bit biased, no?


"thunder" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 12 May 2004 19:05:42 +0000, NOYB wrote:


Perhaps America's long nightmare with G.W. Bush is coming to an end.

Perhaps not:

CNN/USA Today/Gallup
Bush 47, Kerry 45, Nader 5, None/No opinion 3

Investors Business Daily/Christian Science Monitor Bush 46, Kerry 41,
Nader 5, Not sure 7

Perhaps:

http://www.zogby.com/news/051004.html




Sheesh. Zogby is an honest pollster, an interesting fellow, and
Republican-leaning. No one questions his integrity...no one except a
BushLemming like you.

I'm not questioning his polling methods nor the results. I'm questioning
his interpretation of the statistics. He seems to ignore the significance
of a key sentence in his blog:
"In that same poll, Kerry leads by 17 points in the Blue States that voted
for Al Gore in 2000, while Bush leads by only 10 points in the Red States
that he won four years ago."

10 points is less than 17, but it's still a huge number to overcome. If
Bush wins the same states as 2000, as Zogby's poll suggests, he wins the
election. In fact, changes in the distribution of electoral college votes
makes Bush the winner by an even larger margin than in 2000.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:2gg05hF2edj5U1@uni-

.....Bush, arguably a
popular if not accomplished POTUS, is doing so poorly compared to an
Eastern establishment pol who is cerebral and complex.

But he's not doing poorly; why do you make such an obviously contrived
statement? Half the country (+/-) think W is doing the right things and
doing them reasonably well. My sense is that a substantial portion of
Kerry's support is there simply because he is *not* Bush. Back during the
primary season, Kerry surged during the last week of the Iowa campaign
because he was *not* Dean, who already had people feeling skittish. He
solidified his position through NH and later because he was *not* Clark, who
couldn't quite figure out big league politics, and because he was *not*
Edwards, who in my view couldn't get traction outside SC because his syrupy
smooth southern tongue reminded too many people (nervously) of the previous
eight years.

Bottom line is that Kerry has wound up where he is because he has shown
people who he isn't. But nobody really knows how much support there is
based on who he is. I personally think there are a lot of people who will
talk Kerry right through October, but go with W in the voting booth.

"John Gaquin" wrote in message ...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:2gg05hF2edj5U1@uni-

.....Bush, arguably a
popular if not accomplished POTUS, is doing so poorly compared to an
Eastern establishment pol who is cerebral and complex.

But he's not doing poorly; why do you make such an obviously contrived
statement? Half the country (+/-) think W is doing the right things and
doing them reasonably well.

And half of the country (+/-) think W is doing the WRONG things, and
doing them horribly.

My sense is that a substantial portion of
Kerry's support is there simply because he is *not* Bush.

Thankfully.

Back during the
primary season, Kerry surged during the last week of the Iowa campaign
because he was *not* Dean, who already had people feeling skittish. He
solidified his position through NH and later because he was *not* Clark, who
couldn't quite figure out big league politics, and because he was *not*
Edwards, who in my view couldn't get traction outside SC because his syrupy
smooth southern tongue reminded too many people (nervously) of the previous
eight years.

Bottom line is that Kerry has wound up where he is because he has shown
people who he isn't. But nobody really knows how much support there is
based on who he is. I personally think there are a lot of people who will
talk Kerry right through October, but go with W in the voting booth.

Now, that's just plain stupid. A lot of people, right about half of
the country, like what Kerry stands for, likes his environmental,
economic, and social issues stances.

Are you as nuts as your name sounds? This latest incident will only further
cement Bush's re-election. It is clearly obvious that the U.S. is further
****ed off, and wants Bush to continue, he is the only leader really who has
shown strong leadership.







"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:c3dhc2g=.b997f617e02668e7d381415e63328ab6@108 4387094.nulluser.com...
From the Rasmussen nightly automated survey:

Kerry 46% Bush 45%

Election 2004 President

National Ballot
Bush 45%
Kerry 46%
Other 4%
Not Sure 5%


Wednesday May 12, 2004--The latest Rasmussen Reports Presidential
Tracking Poll shows Senator John F. Kerry with 46% of the vote and
President George W. Bush earning 45%.

Senator Kerry has now been ahead or tied for nine of the last ten days.

Data released yesterday showed that most Americans now say it is
unlikely that Iraq will emerge as a peaceful nation enjoying freedom and
democracy. Earlier in the week, Rasmussen Reports polling found that
just 46% of voters believe the United States and its allies are winning
the War on Terror.

As Americans assess the economy, geopolitical events have overwhelmed
Friday's report of job creation. The Rasmussen Consumer Index, a daily
measure of the nation's economic confidence, has fallen for three
straight days. Normally, that Index would have made double digit gains
following a better than expected employment report.

----------------------------------------------

Perhaps America's long nightmare with G.W. Bush is coming to an end.

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:2gg05hF2edj5U1@uni-

.....Bush, arguably a
popular if not accomplished POTUS, is doing so poorly compared to an
Eastern establishment pol who is cerebral and complex.

But he's not doing poorly; why do you make such an obviously contrived
statement? Half the country (+/-) think W is doing the right things and
doing them reasonably well.

And half of the country (+/-) think W is doing the WRONG things, and
doing them horribly.

My sense is that a substantial portion of
Kerry's support is there simply because he is *not* Bush.

Thankfully.

Back during the
primary season, Kerry surged during the last week of the Iowa campaign
because he was *not* Dean, who already had people feeling skittish. He
solidified his position through NH and later because he was *not* Clark,
who
couldn't quite figure out big league politics, and because he was *not*
Edwards, who in my view couldn't get traction outside SC because his
syrupy
smooth southern tongue reminded too many people (nervously) of the
previous
eight years.

Bottom line is that Kerry has wound up where he is because he has shown
people who he isn't. But nobody really knows how much support there is
based on who he is. I personally think there are a lot of people who
will
talk Kerry right through October, but go with W in the voting booth.

Now, that's just plain stupid. A lot of people, right about half of
the country, like what Kerry stands for, likes his environmental,
economic, and social issues stances.

The Democratic party base is comprised of a conglomeration of union
lemmings, sexual deviants, welfare recipients, people with education levels
below a high school diploma, and ex-cons who successfully got their names
expunged from can-not-vote lists. You really think the bulk of the
Democratic party even has a "clue" about Kerry's stances on the environment,
the economy, and other social issues?

Tuuk wrote:

Are you as nuts as your name sounds?

Say what?


This latest incident will only further
cement Bush's re-election.

Really? So are you saying the Bush Administration should plan activities
in Iraq that result in more beheadings?



It is clearly obvious that the U.S. is further
****ed off, and wants Bush to continue, he is the only leader really who has
shown strong leadership.


Clearly obvious? To whom? Someone like you who is suffering from dementia?

"NOYB" wrote in message
news

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:2gg05hF2edj5U1@uni-

.....Bush, arguably a
popular if not accomplished POTUS, is doing so poorly compared to
an
Eastern establishment pol who is cerebral and complex.

But he's not doing poorly; why do you make such an obviously
contrived
statement? Half the country (+/-) think W is doing the right things
and
doing them reasonably well.

And half of the country (+/-) think W is doing the WRONG things, and
doing them horribly.

My sense is that a substantial portion of
Kerry's support is there simply because he is *not* Bush.

Thankfully.

Back during the
primary season, Kerry surged during the last week of the Iowa
campaign
because he was *not* Dean, who already had people feeling skittish.
He
solidified his position through NH and later because he was *not*
Clark,
who
couldn't quite figure out big league politics, and because he was
*not*
Edwards, who in my view couldn't get traction outside SC because his
syrupy
smooth southern tongue reminded too many people (nervously) of the
previous
eight years.

Bottom line is that Kerry has wound up where he is because he has
shown
people who he isn't. But nobody really knows how much support there
is
based on who he is. I personally think there are a lot of people
who
will
talk Kerry right through October, but go with W in the voting booth.

Now, that's just plain stupid. A lot of people, right about half of
the country, like what Kerry stands for, likes his environmental,
economic, and social issues stances.

The Democratic party base is comprised of a conglomeration of union
lemmings, sexual deviants, welfare recipients, people with education
levels
below a high school diploma, and ex-cons who successfully got their
names
expunged from can-not-vote lists. You really think the bulk of the
Democratic party even has a "clue" about Kerry's stances on the
environment,
the economy, and other social issues?

You forgot the common thread......they all want guvmint to think for them,
and they want guvmint to take from those who are productive and think for
themselves.

No, not at all Harry,
This latest incident reveals exactly what the world (not just Americans of
which you are). It is shocking to hear you defend these people Harry and put
your own leader down. I just saw the entire video of the beheading, you came
to mind. You and the deadly disease over there that the U.S. must stop. You
Harry, as soon as I saw that poor American held down and screaming I thought
of You Harry. You and your persistent attempts to let those killers live.
You keep saying the U.S. should clean up and drag themselves home with their
tail between their legs, but you would be leaving the same killers alive and
continuing to kill innocent people. Have you seen the complete video there
Harry? Were you cheering the same chant they were? "God is good" tell me
there Harry,, were you applauding when they held the head of the poor
American? Were you shouting and putting down Bush along with them? Not only
are you a liar Harry,, your also a sick human.

Go ahead Harry,,, fling some mud back,,, what are your latest insults
towards me, dementia? That is pretty good one Harry. Harry, why don't you go
to the parents of that young man who had his head cut off, tell them how
much you hate Bush and you want all Americans to return and leave the
disease of killers still alive and actively growing. What are you Harry?
Some kind of a coward?








"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Tuuk wrote:

Are you as nuts as your name sounds?

Say what?


This latest incident will only further
cement Bush's re-election.

Really? So are you saying the Bush Administration should plan activities
in Iraq that result in more beheadings?



It is clearly obvious that the U.S. is further
****ed off, and wants Bush to continue, he is the only leader really who
has
shown strong leadership.


Clearly obvious? To whom? Someone like you who is suffering from dementia?

Tuuk wrote:

No, not at all Harry,
This latest incident reveals exactly what the world (not just Americans of
which you are). It is shocking to hear you defend these people Harry and put
your own leader down.


You'd be more fun if you could think, just a little. Please show me a
post where I defended the thugs who beheaded Berg.

As for putting Bush down, I plead guilty. The man is an unmitigated
disaster as POTUS, and should be held accountable for what is now
happening in Iraq.


I just saw the entire video of the beheading, you came
to mind.


Really? I don't get off on watching people die. I didn't watch the video.


You and the deadly disease over there that the U.S. must stop. You
Harry, as soon as I saw that poor American held down and screaming I thought
of You Harry. You and your persistent attempts to let those killers live.
You keep saying the U.S. should clean up and drag themselves home with their
tail between their legs, but you would be leaving the same killers alive and
continuing to kill innocent people. Have you seen the complete video there
Harry? Were you cheering the same chant they were? "God is good" tell me
there Harry,, were you applauding when they held the head of the poor
American? Were you shouting and putting down Bush along with them? Not only
are you a liar Harry,, your also a sick human.


We haven't the slightest chance of cleaning up Iraq. We shouldn't have
invaded Iraq at all.


Go ahead Harry,,, fling some mud back,,, what are your latest insults
towards me, dementia? That is pretty good one Harry. Harry, why don't you go
to the parents of that young man who had his head cut off, tell them how
much you hate Bush and you want all Americans to return and leave the
disease of killers still alive and actively growing. What are you Harry?
Some kind of a coward?


It's sad that Berg died; he did nothing to deserve being murdered. But,
then, neither do the victims of most handgun killings in the United States.

The information emerging about Berg makes it appear as if he were an
absolute idiot. What the hell was he doing, freelancing for work in a
war zone? If his family really cared, why did it not STOP him from going
to Iraq by whatever means possible? No, I am not saying the victim and
his family were responsible for his death. But Berg certainly lacked in
brain power.