Who is currently gaining in the polls?

[Reaganfan]

I think Bush is doing better than he was.

[DarthKosh]

I think Bush is doing better than he was.

It's even at the moment.

[agcatter]

Pretty even I'd say.

[Beet]

There's no big movement one way or the other... it's bouncing up and down.

[Reaganfan]

I think by election night polls will show:

Bush-57%
Kerry- 42%
Nader- 1%

[7,052,770]

I think by election night polls will show:

Bush-57%
Kerry- 42%
Nader- 1%

Ooooh no, definitely not.
More likely:
Kerry-48%
Bush-48%
Nader-3%

[Beet]

I think by election night polls will show:

Bush-57%
Kerry- 42%
Nader- 1%

Unfortunately I have to agree with you.

[agcatter]

I wish it were the case but I think it will be a 2 or 3 pt election at the most.  Even Dukakis was within 7 pts and that was before California, New Jersey, and Illinois disappeared from the GOP radar screen.

[Dave from Michigan]

Bush 50%
Kerry 48%

[Dave from Michigan]

Bush 50%
Kerry 48%

by election day

[??????????]

You know if the economy keeps going the way it is Democrats that Bush is going to slowly start picking up steam in the polls. If Bush is a one termer he will certainly be the most successful one-termer in U.S. History. Where was Clinton at this point? And isnt it true the Mondale led Reagan at this point in 84?

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

I think by election night polls will show:

Bush-57%
Kerry- 42%
Nader- 1%

Bush could end up winning easily, but this is twice the margin by which Bush 41 beat Dukakis, and much more than Reagan beat Carter by.    

Also, if Kerry somehow ended up that unpopular, you would see a much bigger Nader vote.

[opebo]

Bush is creeping upwards in the polls.  51-48 by election day.

[??????????]

My dream

Bush 75%

Kerry 23%

Nader 2%

Reality

Bush 54%

Kerry 44%

Nader 2%

[Ben.]

You know if the economy keeps going the way it is Democrats that Bush is going to slowly start picking up steam in the polls. If Bush is a one termer he will certainly be the most successful one-termer in U.S. History. Where was Clinton at this point? And isnt it true the Mondale led Reagan at this point in 84?

No… Mondale lead Reagan in polls conducted the year before the 1984 presidential election (he had been VP.. some name rec was not bad for him)… Dukakis lead Bush (41) from late May to the Democratic Convention and after that Bush retook the lead… Clinton always lead Dole, however in 1993 and 1994 many suspected that he would not get re-elected (kinda the opposite to Bush, back in 2002 and 2003 when he seemed invincible)…  In terms of poll numbers Bush is pretty well in between those Presidents who have got a second term and those who have lost, however in the “right direction/ wrong direction” section of most polls Bush is lumped with most of the presidents who have failed to win a second term… but imho precedence’s mean nothing in presidential elections the only thing you can gain from the past (and the recent past at that) is detecting trends… and all you can really say about this election is that it will probably be close… if jobs pick up Bush will probably pull ahead, however if jobs remain stagnant and the Iraq situation continues to be unstable Kerry might well begin to move forwards… however a Kerry surge would probably be much latter than any Bush surge IMHO…                                  

[Platypus]

Bush 47% -but a majority of EVs
Kerry 49%
Nader 3%

Three weeks later, Nader is assasinated

[??????????]

You cold compare this almost to the 1864 election where many many people thought that Lincoln was going to lose. Rough economy, unpopular war, questionable foreign and domestic policy. And that was in the 1860s!

[angus]

You cold compare this almost to the 1864 election where many many people thought that Lincoln was going to lose. Rough economy, unpopular war, questionable foreign and domestic policy. And that was in the 1860s!

The NYT had a wonderful comparison back in 2002 of just that situation.  It started with a long paragraph taken from that fine publication from 1861ish, but they don't tell you it's 140 years old.  Massive war protests in NYC and Philadelphia, the national guard called out to thoroughly beat and arrest protesters, an ineffectual buffoon for a president, a bloody war in which the US army is loosing battle after battle to an inferior and impoverished foe, foreign governments such as France and England publicly denouncing the US President and his war, editorials in London, Berlin, Paris, and Rome sympathizing with the enemy of the USA, the only official in the administration anyone likes is the secretary of state.  Then the article says it's secretary Seward.  And you're like "huh?!"  It's very clever.  I think you might enjoy reading it statesrights, but it's probably archived by now, meaning it costs money.

[??????????]

I think I have read it. And it was pretty derned close to today.

[John]

Well i Say
By Election Night
bush will Win A 2nd Term
Bush: 51%
Kerry: 46%

[angus]

Well i Say
By Election Night
bush will Win A 2nd Term
Bush: 51%
Kerry: 46%

But the question was one of flow, not one of stock.  "Who is gaining?"  not  "Who is ahead?"  Clearly Bush is gaining in the Vorlon-approved polls.  As for your optimistic prediction:  I like it very much.  But I'm not sure Kim Jung-Il will like it.  

[Kghadial]

Well i Say
By Election Night
bush will Win A 2nd Term
Bush: 51%
Kerry: 46%

But the question was one of flow, not one of stock.  "Who is gaining?"  not  "Who is ahead?"  Clearly Bush is gaining in the Vorlon-approved polls.  As for your optimistic prediction:  I like it very much.  But I'm not sure Kim Jung-Il will like it.  

I don't like Bush gaining in the polls. But Osama does.

Percent prediction:

Bush: 49.2%
Kerry: 48.9% (but wins electoral college)
Nader: 1%

Kerry will get utterly torched in 2000 close states like Missouri, Arkansas, Tennessee, and get beat decently in nevada. He'll just pull out wins in Ohio (perhaps Florida instead) and Penn and WV and NH. Thus Goring Bush.

[Beet]

Why could it be 57-42? I think this article accurately describes the situation in many ways

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37313

Besides the differences mentioned in the article, there's one other thing I disagree with in the comparison to 1984... in 1984, the Democrats were going to hold onto the House no matter how big Reagan's victory was. This year, Bush's coattails could give Republicans their biggest majorities in Congress since 1946, or nearly sixty years. Perhaps a comparison with 1964 would be more appropriate.

[Reaganfan]

I think by June, Bush will have a better lead once Keery has a running mate. And, who knows? Bush/Giuliani might still be in the works...

[Beet]

The conventions will give Kerry a bounce, but Bush's final pull away will not happen until August or September. Assuming the gargantuan financial bubble does not burst by then.