Jobber of the Week Posted September 5, 2004 Report Posted September 5, 2004 He's only owned Gore and Richards. Owned Gore? He was far more charismatic than Gore, but I woudln't say his actual content was any better. FUZZY MATH! FUZZY MATH FUZZY MATH! What was the question?
Guest MikeSC Posted September 5, 2004 Report Posted September 5, 2004 He's only owned Gore and Richards. Owned Gore? He was far more charismatic than Gore, but I woudln't say his actual content was any better. FUZZY MATH! FUZZY MATH FUZZY MATH! What was the question? The debates killed Gore's candidacy. BTW, Newsweek ALSO has Bush up by 11. -=Mike
Guest Smell the ratings!!! Posted September 5, 2004 Report Posted September 5, 2004 didn't Gore get more votes?
Rob E Dangerously Posted September 5, 2004 Report Posted September 5, 2004 Didn't Bush have a double digit lead on Gore in October 2000, around the time of the debates?
kkktookmybabyaway Posted September 6, 2004 Report Posted September 6, 2004 He did? I don't remember (didn't pay that much attention, either), although I do seem to recall some media talking heads thinking Bush would win the popular vote and Gore the electoral...
Guest MikeSC Posted September 6, 2004 Report Posted September 6, 2004 didn't Gore get more votes? Not in Florida where it mattered. Didn't Bush have a double digit lead on Gore in October 2000, around the time of the debates? While I can't speak definitively, I'm fairly sure neither man had a double digit lead. -=Mike
jesse_ewiak Posted September 6, 2004 Report Posted September 6, 2004 Um, Mike, the Newsweek polls internals make that famous LA Times poll look balanced. For example, all polls over the last year for party ID have basically been 32D/29-30R/38-39I. The newsweek poll had 38R/31D/30I. In other words, take the Indies out, and the GOP has a 55/45 lead in turnout, which I think you would even say isn't going to happen in this election. Also, it had military families as 42% of the respondents, which yeah, is a bit off. Personally, Bush is probably up 6-8.
kkktookmybabyaway Posted September 6, 2004 Report Posted September 6, 2004 The debates killed Gore's candidacy. I don't know if they "killed" it, but, imo, they made him look like an ass. Remember the first debate he kept sighing whenever Bush talked, and in the third debate he walked over to W. like a bully and Bush just looked up at him and nodded. Funny stuff. Plus, Al kept breaking the rules of the debates...
Guest MikeSC Posted September 6, 2004 Report Posted September 6, 2004 The debates killed Gore's candidacy. I don't know if they "killed" it, but, imo, they made him look like an ass. Remember the first debate he kept sighing whenever Bush talked, and in the third debate he walked over to W. like a bully and Bush just looked up at him and nodded. Funny stuff. Plus, Al kept breaking the rules of the debates... kkk --- quick questions time: How many seconds into debate one will it take Kerry to mention Vietnam? How many times will he mention it during the debates? Will it be under triple digits? -=Mike
kkktookmybabyaway Posted September 6, 2004 Report Posted September 6, 2004 I'll say 25 seconds into his opening speech, and if there are three debates then I'll say triple digits...
Guest GreatOne Posted September 6, 2004 Report Posted September 6, 2004 This is gonna be great............. Mod: 'Mr. Bush. Describe the current economic state' GW: 'Rebounding, the t..........' JK: 'THAT'S A LIE CAUSE I SERVED IN VIETNAM, EXPLAIN 1972-73!' GW: 'You mean when you were cheerleading with Jane? Fine let's talk.' See them 18-30s don't need WWE to vote
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now