Dr. Tyler; Captain America

My plan to use emo chicks to reinvigorate the chat has backfired.

Like I said, he comes off as remotely bearable on the stump, but he's absolutely horrible when he has to think for himself. Just look at the debates in 2000 and his press conferences where he actually had to answer questions; he looks like he's gonna cry half the time. He's about as boring a speaker as Kerry is. The difference between the two is truly negligable.

Read an encyclopedia. He's not from Texas.

Annenburg? I'm not familiar with that polling outfit. http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm http://www.pollingreport.com/BushFav.htm From the same source as your graph, with many different poll sources. And then, there's this: http://www.pollingreport.com/wh2004.htm Polling Report is great, by the way. The poll I referenced earlier about Kerry being trusted more in like, everything is on there. Also, the Annenburg poll you mentioned has a very weird methodology for the favorability ratings. It's not a "yes vs. no" answer at all; it's a "rate from 1-10" answer, and thus, can't be taken the same way as a normal favorability ratings poll. Most favorability polls I've seen have Bush's negatives in the 40's and Kerry's "unknown" numbers in the 20's (but negatives only in the 20's, too.)

http://forums.thesmartmarks.com/index.php?...ic=45176&st=60#

Pot. Kettle. Black. And Bill Richardson was considered, so STFU.

Uh, no, considering I'm not really enthusiastic about Kerry's platform, either.

Shut up. You like You Got Served.

Oh, please. Don't even pretend there weren't "GREAT ECONOMIC GROWTH!!!" headlines after the overblown Q1 numbers were released... until they were revised downward, anyway.

On what do you base this opinion? Because as recently as two weeks ago, multiple polls had Kerry leading or tied with Bush on both of those issues. Because the economy is rebounding in a major way and we'll be slowly pulling out of Iraq. It's going to be hard for Kerry to constantly claim that things are getting worse when they clearly aren't. -=Mike Except the economy has been "rebounding" for months and months now, and yet, people STILL percieve it as being "bad". Do you suddenly think that people will have a dramatic shift of opinion between now and July? They're still going to equate "Bush" with "recession", and all the democrats need to do is bring up the net job growth for an easy victory. Recent months aside, there is little chance Bush will have a net positive job growth by November. That issue is not a good one for Bush to bring up. He should run on the same thing that won it for the Repugs in 2002, and that's fear mongering; however, I'm not so sure that's even gonna work at this point.

You'd find another reason to hate him. Don't deny it. The question is stupid anyway. It's like saying, "Well, if Bush took up a platform like Kerry's, would you support him?"

No, because he's a democrat. -=Mike

On what do you base this opinion? Because as recently as two weeks ago, multiple polls had Kerry leading or tied with Bush on both of those issues.

Still, hardly anyone outside of the health care field (or the right) care about it. EDIT: It being these cases. The reason being because nobody understands what, exactly, went on during them. Edited for clarity.

Kerry doesn't seem like he'd be good when it isn't planned out, but he is. I think it forces him to not sit there and rehearse the whole thing over and over again in his boring monotone. He puts passion into the debates, and let's face it: most people choose their candidate based on the debates. So, he probably won't have a problem there.

Bush comes across best on the stump, whereas Kerry looks better on the podium. It seems that Kerry actually looks like he has an opinion when he has someone to disagree with. Bush, on the other hand, is great when everything is planned out for him. However, he's horrible when he has to improvise.

Well, the usage of junk science in his trials is going to be a FERTILE ground for mockery. Look up his cases dealing with cerebal palsy. -=Mike Yeah, because that makes for fascinating news stories.

You're STILL ignoring Bush's total lack of charisma. Kerry, at least, is a decent debator. Bush looks so horribly awkward on the podium that with those two on the same stage, no one will think very negatively about Kerry's charisma.

Really, though, no one's naive enough to think it doesn't factor in. I'm just amused that people think Bush is more charasmatic than Kerry, and that this makes him more likely to win. That's like saying that Osama bin Laden is more evil than Saddam Hussein, so Saddam obviously will go to heaven. Seriously, they're both so heinously devoid of charisma that it's not even gonna matter. Edwards will be a breath of fresh air.

http://forums.thesmartmarks.com/index.php?showtopic=57221

Shorter MikeSC:

i had to go to the store, or i would've just spammed 14 or so replies in a row. i was kinda curious as to how many it would've taken myself.

It takes fourteen replies, apparently.

I don't think it has to break a page.

Eh, guess not.