Kerry expanding into Virginia

[California Dreamer]

This could just be political payback to Governor Warner for his endorsement during the primaries. He wanted on the shortlist.

Kerry's team is probably just seeing if their is any chance of a VA win.

[California Dreamer]

head to heads are not the whole story...especially before the conventions during a reelection year. The right track wrong track numbers and the Bush approval numbers have to be factored in.

And even when looking at head to heads, independent candidates always poll better than they actually do.

When you look at all the national numbers today
Bush in 3 way
Bush in 2 way
Bush approval
Right track

all are in mid to low 40s...with right track in the 30s.

Bush needs to get these numbers into the high 40s at least and really into the 50s if he is going to win.

[California Dreamer]

This is why that election projection map shows Kerry doing much better than his head to head. One can argue to the weighting that they give to Bush's approval and right track/wrong track, but at least they are factoring them in.

it is traditional for a challenger to take time to get the voters to know him...therefore the head to heads are a lagging indicator to the approval and right track, at this point. (Closer to the election it will reverse and head to head will be more indicitive). Although they are interesting...Head to heads are not very accurate until after both conventions when the swing voters start paying attention.


Of note, in the recent annenburg study, Kerry has boosted his positives in the BG states by 4% in the last month, probably due to his first set of bio ads (and despite the same amount spend on attack ads from Bush)...but there are still quite a few 'neutral' or 'no opinion'. Whereas Bush has very few people who are nuetral or have no opinion.

[California Dreamer]

Bush isnt leading in BG states

 latest (May 23) Gallup

...not Bush  +5, but Kerry +5  kind of different

[California Dreamer]

well I guess we are even

but I would like to see proof that the other two BG polls show a Bush lead. The only other BG poll I saw this week was the (potentially dubious) Zogby which showed Kerry leading so far that Bush should just pack it in now.

[California Dreamer]

So you agree that there are discrepencies with the BG polls (2 up and 2 down). Plus you agree that the right track and approval numbers should be factored in, and that those both show problems for Bush.

Then like other Republicans here, your predictions are 'faith based'....thats fine, but it certainly isnt a neutral objective observation

If you really want to make the case for Bush and pretend its objective, then go to jobs and economic numbers and not rely exclusively on cherry picking a few head to head polls 5 months before a reelection.

[California Dreamer]

So you agree that there are discrepencies with the BG polls (2 up and 2 down). Plus you agree that the right track and approval numbers should be factored in, and that those both show problems for Bush.

Then like other Republicans here, your predictions are 'faith based'....thats fine, but it certainly isnt a neutral objective observation

If you really want to make the case for Bush and pretend its objective, then go to jobs and economic numbers and not rely exclusively on cherry picking a few head to head polls 5 months before a reelection.

I averaged 10 polls in my post... hardly cherrypicking, other than an "insider advantage" that showed a tie, I think I used every single poll out there...

I even included CBS which is pro kerry by 6% versus the average of the other 9

If you were less stidently partisan your arguments would work better.

you agree that head to heads are not an indicator, yet you use them for your 'prediction', even using a flawed one. You agree that one should factor in right track and job approval, yet you ignore them.

I freely admint I am partisan, I like partisan people. And your predictions fit well into all the other Republicans who 'hope' for a Bush reelection, just stop pretending it isnt.

[California Dreamer]

you agreed that head to heads are not the sole indicator

yet that is all you use to justify your 'prediction'...and even the head to heads dont show a Bush win.

and you agree that you shouldnt ignore the right track and the job approvals...yet your do ignore them for your prediction


Look I have no problem with hope based predictions....everyone here has one...and so do you.....just dont try to dress it up as anything else.


If Bush's numbers bounce back in June....then you can say it is numbers based....until then it is 'faith based'

[California Dreamer]

Or maybe I have access to more numbers than you do, and understand them better....  

Have a great weekend..

ahhhh....the fabled 'secret information' like that guy who had his secret 'inside info' on who's on the real Kerry Shortlist.

dude..I dont have a problem with you...just admit that your predictions are effected by your pro Bush bias just like everyone else. admitting you are biased is the first step....we are all biased....are we to assume that you are the only unbiased person (highly unlikely a lifelong Republican can suddenly become unbiased)