Why Bush will win

[opebo]

Can you post links when you post polls, thanks.

Yes and if Bush makes these states competitive it helps down ticket for state govt and congress and senate also.

If Bush maintains a lead in CA, there is no way Dean or any other Democrat can win.
Even if Bush is just close in CA the Democrats will have to divert vast amounts of money and time to hold CA, limiting their chances of success in other states.
Besides the surpisingly large lead over Dean in CA (16%), Bush also leads in another Democratic must win state: MI by 17%

sure:

The survey, conducted by Probolsky Research, finds Bush winning a majority of votes, or 50.9 percent. Dean garnered 35.4 percent, while 3.7 percent of respondents would choose a candidate other than Bush or Dean. Ten percent said they were not sure.  MOE 4% Conducted in both English and Spanish, the poll included the responses of 625 Californians
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36579

I have seen polls giving the Dems the lead in Michigan.

www.dcpoliticalreport.com/2004/polls04.htm

I like this site Gustaf - most encouraging of all was Bush's strong showing in Ohio polling.  

[opebo]

Hey I wonder what happened to my post above?

Here's a repost:
The survey, conducted by Probolsky Research in early January, finds Bush winning a majority of MI votes, or 50.9 percent. Dean garnered 35.4 percent, while 3.7 percent of respondents would choose a candidate other than Bush or Dean. Ten percent said they were not sure.  MOE 4% Conducted in both English and Spanish, the poll included the responses of 625 Californians
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36579

Quote:
 

I have seen polls giving the Dems the lead in Michigan.

www.dcpoliticalreport.com/2004/polls04.htm
Quote:
 

Yes, but those polls are 5 and 9 months out of date, as the cmapaign moves forward its likley voters will pay more attention and solidfy their opinions.  So far evey poll I've seen shows voters pick an unnamed Democrat more often than a named Democrat.  Perhaps the more voters get to know Democrats the more they prefer Bush

Dean is not the nominee anymore, and Kerry is a much stronger candidate. I expect California and Michigan both to vote clearly for Kerry. He will break 200 EVs.

I think you're about right - 200 to around 230 is Kerry's potential.  The most realistic looking contributed maps are at about that level.  But I don't think Kerry is that much more likely to actually win than Dean.  He'll just lose less badly, and I'm not sure how that will matter.  Will it mean a smaller increase in the Republican Senate majority?  I don't see how.

[opebo]

Yeah, right. You keep saying that about everyone in the Dem field. Dean was a bit of a wierdo, Kerry has better appeal, as well as the whole vet thing. He's a stronger candidate, I'm pretty sure of that.

How is Kerry stronger?:

He has a more liberal voting record than Ted Kennedy.  

He is not going to win a single state in the South in a 50/50 election.

The NRA is going to come after him BIGTIME.

As gays travel to Mass to get married and return to their home states to demand recognition, Mass will be constantly in the news and that will reflect badly on Kerry.

His war record will be met with his anti-defense voting record and Jane Fonda protest ties.

Kerry is stronger only in one way - he seems very reliable, predictable, reassuring - a member of the 'establishment'.  I know he's a liberal, and by definition it is dangerous having a liberal in charge of anything - but particularly national defense and foreign policy.  I'm just saying that he gives the *impression* of someone who is more reliable than Dean for example - or even Edwards for that matter.  I don't think this will win him the election, but I do think it means he wins a few more 'leans Democrat' states than Dean would have.