The Crystal Ball

Here's my intial prediction for this tuesday's outcome.

Kerry: 272

Bush: 266

Kerry Victory

Swingers: State by State

Bush will win:

Florida, Iowa, New Mexico

Kerry will win:

PA, Ohio, Wisconsin, and New Hampshire

Wisconsin in the key right now, how it breaks on November 2, will likely determine the outcome of this election.

GO KERRY!!!

5 days and counting....

Drudge Strikes Again!!

Matt drudge posted a "DRUDGE EXCLUSIVE" yesterday claiming that ABC news was withholding a story regarding a possible terrorist attack on the United States. Imagine that....a news organization waiting to verify a claim before they publish it....WHAT A NOVEL IDEA!!! I know Drudge is unaccustomed to this was of doing things, BUT ITS CALLED JOURNALISM!!! Maybe he could take a few tips before he posts his next Kerry love affair story......


Matt Drudge represents everything that is wrong with the American media today...

Polls Polls and more Polls

This is an intresting bit of info which might shed some light on the variance in recent polls. Here are a listing of polls conducted on October 19, 2000.


ABC 10/19 48% BUSH 43% GORE


Gallup 10/19 50% BUSH 40% GORE


Opinion Dynamics 10/19 45%BUSH 42% GORE

Now at first glance you might surmise that the polls got it right, BUSH WON! Well....you'd be wrong, these are polls of the general public, they measure the popular vote. I think we all remember how that worked out. To put this in persepective, two weeks before the election in 2000, GALLUP, one of the most reputable polling agencies was more then ten points off the mark. A majority of the rest of the field followed suit.

Polling is not an exact science. Not at all.

3-0

Game...Set....Match.

Snap shot polls after the debate showed that Senator Kerrey won his widest margin of victory in any of the three debates.


CNN/USA Today/Gallup: Kerry wins 53%-39%.
CBS News poll of uncommitted voters: Kerry wins 39%-25%
ABC News: Kerry wins 42%-41%, even though their audience had significantly more Republicans.
Democracy Corps: Kerry wins 41%-36%.

Intial thoughts:

Kerry was in the zone...Best I have ever seen him. Hands down.

I didn't think that Bush had a bad debate, he was just so clearly outmatched you almost felt sorry for him.


MUCH MUCH MORE on all this later.

THE COALITION v. the coalition

There has been a great deal of debate surrounding our current “coalition of the willing", and how much of a coalition it really is. I found some interesting statistics which highlight some important points,

"During the 1991 Gulf War (according to U.S. Central Command's official history of that conflict), 37 other nations took part, sending a total of 800,000 soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines, as well as 300 combat support battalions, over 225 naval vessels, and 2,800 fixed-wing aircraft. Those aircraft flew 112,000 sorties and dropped 87,000 tons of munitions on Iraqi targets. Among the nations sending at least one army division were Egypt and Syria. Now that's a coalition."

GET OUT OF TOWN!!! Yeah, I had no idea either...WE EVEN HAD ARAB COUNTRIES FIGHTING ON OUR SIDE!! Pretty damn amazing what effective diplomacy can accomplish. Kudos to Bush Senior...

Now lets examine our current "coalition",

"All told, according to the report, they're contributing about 24,000 troops. The British alone are supplying about 8,000. So the remaining 30 countries have a total of 16,000 troops in Iraq—an average of just over 500 troops per country. The United States has about 130,000 troops over there—more than five times as many as all the other 31 countries combined."

Let’s do some quick math, that means according to official U.S. records we have 776,000 less soldiers from other countries in this coalition then we did in our last COALITION....

We don't have a single ARAB nation fighting with us...

Hmmmm....

What I don't understand is how Republicans are unable to grasp that when Democrats criticize the coalition’s strength and size they are not criticizing our allies, or demeaning the work they have done and continue to do. They are criticizing the Bush administrations failure to effectively mount a COALITION like we had in the first gulf war. A coalition that would have lessened the burden on our country’s military and added legitimacy to our peace effort. Just imagine if we had Egyptian and Syrian soldiers on our side…would Arabs be firing at other Arabs…would Iraqis still view us as an invading force…unfortunately we’ll never know.

But what do I know...Compare the two sets of statistics.... decide yourself.

Cheney V. the Truth

Courtesey of The Washington Monthly,

What Cheney Said:

"Your hometown newspaper has taken to calling you Senator Gone."

The Actual Truth:

Cheney was referring to The Pilot, a small paper in Pinehurst, NC — not Edwards' hometown. What's more, as they themselves put it today, "The Pilot hasn't 'taken to calling him' anything."

What Cheney Said:

"The senator has got his facts wrong. I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11..."

The Actual Truth:

Cheney knows perfectly well that he's been one of the administration's biggest boosters of alleged ties between Saddam Hussein and 9/11. In September 2003 Cheney said "[Iraq is] the geographical base of the terrorists who had us under assault for many years, but most especially on 9-11." What's more, he has suggested that Saddam Hussen was connected with 9/11 on numerous other occasions.

What Cheney Said:

"...the 90 percent figure is just dead wrong. When you include the Iraqi security forces that have suffered casualties, as well as the allies, they've taken almost 50 percent of the casualties in operations in Iraq."

The Actual Truth:

Edwards wasn't "dead wrong." He was dead right. Iraq isn't part of the coalition(and has never been listed as part of the "Coalition of the Willing"), as of Tuesday 1,061 American service members had been killed compared to 136 from non-U.S. coalition forces. That's 88% of all coalition casualties.

What Cheney Said:

"They know the charges are false.

They know that if you go, for example, to factcheck.com [sic], an independent Web site sponsored by the University of Pennsylvania, you can get the specific details with respect to Halliburton."

The Actual Truth:

Cheney meant to refer to factcheck.org, but it doesn't really matter because they don't have anything that addresses Edwards' accusations anyway. In fact, Edwards' charges are all accurate.

(In a statement released after the debate, factcheck.org said, "...Edwards was talking about Cheney's responsibility for earlier Halliburton troubles. And in fact, Edwards was mostly right.")

What Cheney Said:

"The Kerry record on taxes is one basically of voting for a large number of tax increases -- 98 times in the United States Senate."

The Actual Truth:

That's a change from the old charge that Kerry has voted to increase taxes 350 times, but it's still false. Factcheck.org — the website Cheney endorsed — says Cheney's number isn't even close to the truth.

What Cheney Said:

Now, in my capacity as vice president, I am the president of Senate, the presiding officer. I'm up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they're in session.

The Actual Truth:

In the past 4 years, there have been 128 Tuesdays. Dick Cheney has served as the presiding officer in the Seate over 2 of them.

One more time, Dick Cheney has presided over 2 Tuesdays, or 1.5% of the total.

During the same period, John Edwards also presided over the Senate twice.

Full list of presiding officers here.


CAN YOU SAY CREDIBILITY GAP!!!!!!!

Poll Update

The lastest Washington Post/ABC poll shows shows Bush's lead dropping from 5% to 2%.

Rasmussen shows Bush's lead dropping from 3.6% to .3%.

Battle Ground States: Zogby has some pretty good news for Kerry in its latest report on battleground states. He has made huge gains in Ohio.

KERRY/EDWARDS 04!!!!!

BOOYAKASHAA!!

CBS gives Edwards a clear victory.

"CBS News tracked the reactions to tonight's vice-presidential debate of a nationwide panel of 169 uncommitted voters - voters who could change their minds before Election Day. Here are the initial results. This scientific poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 7 percentage points:
By 41% to 29%, uncommitted debate watchers say Edwards won the debate tonight."

ABC gives the edge to Cheney.

Intresting side note, Bush supporters will point the following poll as evidence that their man won the debate... but a quick look at the internal numbers turn that notion on its head.

"ABC News poll, 509 interviews +/- 4.5

Who won? (among debate viewers)

Cheney 43%
Edwards 35%
Tie 19%

Vote preference among debate viewers Before the debate,

Bush/Cheney 51%
Kerry/Edwards 50%

After Debate

Kerry/Edwards 49%
Bush/Cheney 48%

Party ID of debate viewersDemocrats
31% Democrats
38 % Republicans
27 % Independents

So after the debate, even though some voters thought Cheney won, they were more likely to vote for Kerry. I will take this outcome ten times out of ten.

In many ways this poll confirms my initial thoughts regarding the debate last night.

Overall, I thought Dick Cheney did quite well, and clearly has a firm grasp of policy which was evident throughout the debate. Stylistically he didn't do much to change the preconceived notions surrounding his "darth vader" like demeanor. He looked dodgy, irritable, and petulant.

But I also thought John Edwards did quite well. I didn't think that he suffered from what many pundits labeled a "gravitas" problem. He stood up on his own two feet and effectively critiqued this administration’s failures over the last four years. My favorite part in the debate was when Edwards blindsided Cheney with a litany of votes he had cast while serving in the House of Representatives. We don't get to hear about CHENEY's voting record too often, it was like a breath of fresh air...

Which brings me to my overall take on who will benefit from last nights debate. I think, as these polls have displayed, that unlike last Thursday’s Presidential debate, its impossible to declare a clear victor; however, I strongly believe the Democrats will benefit much more than their Republican counterparts from this debate in the long run, and here's why.

I don't think Cheney's performance will win over a lot of undecided voters, regardless of whether or not they thought he won the debate. Last night Cheney spoke to Republican believers, he was preaching to the choir. He didn't come off as especially likable, and contrary to what some talking heads are saying, I don't think he landed many punches on Edwards or Kerry for that matter. One of his best lines has already been discredited on this site, and will be discredited all over the news for the next two days along with many of his other statements. Cheney denied things he has undoubtedly stated in the past. I.E. Connections between Iraq and 9-11.(check back later for post on this) Our Vice-President has a credibility problem, plain and simple, last night is only going to pour salt on it...

Senator Edwards’ down home charm served him well last night, and I think he reached out to a portion of the American electorate that Kerry is unable to. He spoke plainly and eloquently about healthcare, the economy, and Iraq. He repeatedly took aim at Cheney's credibility problem. I think much of what he stated was specifically targeted at undecided voters timid about facing another four years of BUSH/CHENEY. In my humble/biased opinion I don't think we could have asked for anything more from Senator Edwards.

Incapable of telling the Truth???

Dick Cheney said this to Senator Edwards at the Vice-Presidential debate last night, "Now, in my capacity as vice president, I am the president of Senate, the presiding officer. I'm up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they're in session. The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight,"

Nice line... too bad its a complete lie. Our Vice-Presdient's insistence on misleading the American public is incredibly disturbing.

"Vice President Dick Cheney said Tuesday night that the debate with Democratic Sen. John Edwards marked the first time they had met. In fact, the two had met at least three times previously...

On Feb. 1, 2001, the vice president thanked Edwards by name at a Senate prayer breakfast and sat beside him during the event.

On April 8, 2001, Cheney and Edwards shook hands when they met off-camera during a taping of NBC's "Meet the Press," moderator Tim Russert said Wednesday on "Today."

On Jan. 8, 2003, the two met when the first-term North Carolina senator accompanied Elizabeth Dole to her swearing-in by Cheney as a North Carolina senator..."

Much more on this, other bold face lies, and the debate later...

Advantage Kerry

Initial thoughts: Kerry cleaned up...

John Kerry spoke eloquently and succinctly in the first presidential debate last night.

It was the best performance I have seen him give as a candidate. If the early polls are any indication, I'm not alone in these sentiments.

CNN/USA Today/Gallup has Kerry the winner 53%-37%.

ABC poll, debate viewers judged Kerry the winner 45%-36%

A CBS poll of uncommitted voters shows Kerry winning 43%-28%.

I thought the President did fine, but looked out matched. He looked confused and at times agitated.

Memo to Bush: The cameras are on you when Senator Kerry is speaking.

The ease with which Senator Kerry spoke on policy, was in stark contrast to the forced answers President Bush offered. Answers that were primarily a regurgitation of the same Republican talking points we've heard over the last few months.

Senator Kerry was forceful, polite, articulate and succeeded at appearing much more presidential that our current President.

He also methodically detailed the harshest indictment of the Iraq war I have heard from anyone.

My favorite moment in the debate: When Senator Kerry called Bush on implying that Iraq attacked us on 9-11. It’s about damn time.

Bush's crotchety reponse will be played on countless late night talk shows.

Summary: I thought Kerry performed marvelously, he was the clear winner. We have got ourselves a race.

And like I said I’m not alone in these sentiments,

Here is the National Review's Jay Nordlinger: Not exactly known for his praise of Senator Kerry."I thought Kerry did very, very well; and I thought Bush did poorly -- much worse than he is capable of doing. Listen: If I were just a normal guy -- not Joe Political Junkie -- I would vote for Kerry. On the basis of that debate, I would. If I were just a normal, fairly conservative, war-supporting guy: I would vote for Kerry. On the basis of that debate."

So would I, and I’m going to.