Watching the pundits and reporters after last night’s Kerry-Bush debate, you’d think it was a tie. A lot of verbiage was devoted to pointing out how much Bush has improved since the first debate… he’s a great “closer”… he “connected” with voters… he made a “strong case” for a second term… blah, blah, blah.
But once again, viewers weren’t buying. Instant polls clearly showed Kerry the victor on points, which means he won politically too.
A CBS poll of “uncommitted” voters (if you ask me, if you’re undecided at this point, you ought to be committed) showed Kerry the winner 39-25 percent, with 36 percent calling it a tie. And a Gallup poll found Kerry won 52-39 percent, nearly the same margin as after the first debate.
Even the ABC poll, which on the surface showed Kerry with a statistically insignificant 42-41 margin, suggested a more decisive victory, that was otherwise skewed in Bush’s favor by the fact that 38 percent of respondents were Republican, and only 30 percent Democrat. More significant, “independents” gave Kerry a 52-43 edge.
Now I’ll be the first to admit that these instapolls are an even bigger load of crap than those tracking polls the media breathlessly reports. But I find it curious that reporters who are so emotionally invested in polling, stubbornly continued to proclaim the debate a tie in the face of their own numbers to the contrary.
The fact is, voters perceived Kerry to have won not one… not two… but all three debates. More importantly, he won be giving a consistent performance. Sure Bush may have come across as a little more likable (assuming you like snarling, mean-spirited drunks,) and Kerry may have come across as a little stiff. But that stiffness also translates into steadfastness, and Bush’s personal attempts to characterize Kerry as a “flip-flopper” fell flat in the presence of the senator’s rock-steady demeanor.
In the end, Americans may not want to go out drinking with Kerry, but they now view him as a reasonable alternative as president. So the election has become what it should have been from the start, a referendum on George Bush’s dismal performance, at home and abroad.
I really only see one way Bush can win this election: he cheats.
With that in mind, it’s still too close to call.
I agree with your last statement ” it’s still too close to call.” I don’t agree with “Bush can win this election: he cheats.” What’s he going to do, post absentee ballots from the dead? Pay the voting officials to lose ballots or fix the electronic voting machines. Better yet pay Ralph Nader to take points away from Kerry cause we all know that can happen right. The fact of the matter is I believe that if the people do their homework and also recall the last 4 years there were improvements and set backs in the Bush administrations. And just like presidents in the past its all about how much you want the set backs to count and do you believe the existing president can make up for those set backs. I myself created my own report card and kept a progress report log on Bush just as I keep track of my kids in school and although I believe he could do certain things better, he has done a good job on his first term and I believe he will continue to do better. Kerry will do fine living off his wife’s inheritance and displaying his well deserved Vietnam medals to friends relatives and grandkids. I have metals and I’ve been in the military but that doesn’t make me a candidate for president. It just means I’m American and I’m willing to die for my country. Not to be used as a PR ploy.
Juan, electoral fraud has a long tradition in the United States, although usually the fraud is not pronounced enough, and the presidential race is not close enough for it to determine the outcome. Perhaps it did in 1960 (although Kennedy and Nixon’s efforts may have canceled each other out.) It certainly determined the outcome in 2000.
You don’t think there’s cheating going on? In Arizona, a firm hired to do voter registration shredded hundreds forms filled out by Democrats. In Florida, the state purges 60,000 “felons” from the rolls, but instructs the firm compiling the list to exclude hispanic names. Also in Florida, while many counties have shifted to touch-screen voting machines that leave no paper trail, the GOP has been advising Republicans to vote by mail. Why? Because the touch-screen machines can’t be included in a recount!
I’m not saying Democrats don’t cheat too. But the GOP controls the majority of state governments, and will use that power to illegally influence the outcome of the election. Personally, I don’t believe the Democrats can possibly win Florida… there simply won’t be a free and fair election.