The W
Views: 99016703
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
18.9.14 1902
The W - Current Events & Politics - New Hampshire: Dean's to Lose?
This thread has 5 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1(1862 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (12 total)
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1235 days
Last activity: 1031 days
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
From Zogby
* * * * * * * * * *
Dean Surges Into Wide Lead Over Kerry, 38%-17%, in Zogby Poll of Likely Democratic Primary Voters in New Hampshire; All Other Candidates in Single Digits; 64% Say Bush Re-Election Likely

Former Vermont Governor Dr. Howard Dean has surged into a wide lead in polling of 501 likely Democratic primary voters in New Hampshire, according to a new poll released today by Zogby International as part of its “Road to Boston” series.

Nearly two in five (38%) supported Dean, giving him a substantial lead over Massachusetts Senator John Kerry at 17%. In February polling in New Hampshire, Kerry led Dean, 26% - 13%. In June, the gap had narrowed to Kerry 25%, Dean 22%.

All other Democratic presidential hopefuls remained in single digits, with Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman and Missouri Congressman Richard Gephardt tied at 6%, followed by North Carolina Senator John Edwards at 4%, and Florida Senator Bob Graham and Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich at 1% each. Former NATO Commander and retired General Wesley Clark, not yet a declared candidate, earned 2%. Civil rights activist Al Sharpton received 0.4%.

Nearly one-in-four (23%) remain undecided as to how they will actually vote in New Hampshire’s much watched January 27th primary.

Pollster John Zogby: “This is stunning. Dean’s surge seems to be at a heavy cost to Kerry, who led Dean in previous New Hampshire polling. Dean has also taken from Gephardt’s standing, and from the undecideds. His support is really across the board … both Congressional districts, men and women, Democrats and independents, liberals and moderates. He’s the candidate to watch at the top of the scale, while some of those down the line might re-think their candidacy at this point.”

Candidate
August 23-26, 2003
June 4-7, 2003
Feb 24, 2003

Dean
38%
22%
13%

Kerry
17
25
26

Lieberman
6
10
9

Gephardt
6
7
11

Edwards
4
2
2

Clark
2
-
1

Graham
1
1
0.4

Kucinich
1
2
1

Sharpton
0.4
1
1

Mosley Braun
-
1
2

Someone Else
1
3
4

Not Sure
23
27
29


501 LV, MOE +/- 4.5%
600 LV, MOE +/- 4.1%
600 LV, MOE +/-4.1%


Nearly two-thirds (64%) of the respondents said they thought it was somewhat (46%) or very likely (18%) that President George W. Bush would be re-elected in 2004.


Dean enjoyed favorable/unfavorable ratings of 71% - 9% with 19% unfamiliar. Kerry earned a 66% - 19% with 13% unfamiliar. Lieberman was 55% favorable, 34% unfavorable, and 12% unfamiliar, and Gephardt was 54% - 23%, with 16% unfamiliar.


New Hampshire is part of Zogby International’s “Road to Boston” series of polls in Iowa, South Carolina, the Granite State, and nationally, leading up to selection of the Democratic presidential nominee at the Boston convention in July 2004.




"Each time I've met Huffington, I wondered if she was not somehow the long-lost daughter of Madame Nicolai Ceaucescu, or a genetic cross between Martha Stewart and Count Dracula. Had this Greek-born harpy lived in medieval times, she would have been sewn up in a bag with a rooster and two snakes and thrown into the nearest river."
-- Eric Margolis, Toronto Star
Promote this thread!
vsp
Andouille








Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 2999 days
Last activity: 212 days
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
    Originally posted by Grimis
    Lieberman
    6
    34% unfavorable



"HAH-HAH!"
/Nelson voice

Schadenfreude at Holy Joe's expense aside... the Dean machine is really rolling, if this poll is accurate. Even skewing the MOE to its maximums to benefit Kerry, that's still a double-digit lead and a very nice approval-disapproval ratio.

Everyone below Gephardt in the chart can pretty much pack up and go home, including Edwards, who many expected more from. (The exception to that is Clark, but he's not officially even running yet, and will be a very interesting wild card if he commits.)

It is still early yet, of course -- around the fourth inning of a nine-inning game, if you will.





(edited by vsp on 27.8.03 1003)


"When WCW tries to be racy, it's generally about as light-heartedly entertaining as watching a man rape a woman in a chicken yard." -- Dark Cheetah
spf
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 50 days
Last activity: 22 hours
AIM:  
#3 Posted on
When you combine these numbers with the fundraising Dean has done lately ($1 million+ in 4 days with another online challenge), I really think the field is going to narrow soon. The no-hopers (Braun, Kucinich, Sharpton) may stay around, but no smart money will be going to them at this point. Gephardt, Edwards, and Lieberman and Graham are all interesting to watch at this point. Lieberman doesn't seem to really be doing anything much in this race except for trying to snipe at Dean, which thus far hasn't been a winning strategy. Edwards hasn't even done that much, and at some point the fact that he is the "southern" candidate will cease to be a useful enough fact to keep him in the race. Same with Graham as the "Florida" candidate. And Gephardt just seems like an afterthought for most people these days, even with a fairly strong amount of labor support. I'm really seeing this race coming down to Dean and Kerry, unless someone makes a major screw-up or a major name enters the race (Hilary and Gore are the only ones that come to mind at this point). I am not thinking much of Clark at this point, as he really has nothing much to offer in the primaries right now. Lieberman already has the "pro-military" thing, Dean was against the war just as loudly as Clark. If he runs, it is solely to keep his name out there as a potential VP candidate, especially if Dean gets the nomination, adding a retired General to the ticket would be a very strong move.

(edited for forgetting about Wesley Clark)

(edited by spf2119 on 27.8.03 1207)


She was worth 800 miles driving to see her play - Brenda Weiler

blogforamerica.com
vsp
Andouille








Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 2999 days
Last activity: 212 days
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
Ironically, I think it'll be Dean-Gephardt or Dean-Lieberman rather than Dean-Kerry. Kerry could come off worse finishing second in NH than Gephardt or Lieberman would finishing third.

Think of it this way: New Hampshire, right in the wheelhouse of both Dean and Kerry and an early barometer of the "liberal" northeast, is sort of a litmus test as to who gets to wave the Liberal-Preferred banner on the way to the nomination. I think it'll come down to one perceived-as-a-liberal candidate (either Dean or Kerry, increasingly likely to be Dean) vs. one status-quo, right-leaning Vichy Democrat (Lieberman or Gephardt) running as the "anti-Dean."

Gephardt will get an early boost from Iowa, as expected, but whether he or Lieberman finishes strongly in NH will help determine their fates. (Strongly == double digits, as neither is expected to be a front-runner there.)





"When WCW tries to be racy, it's generally about as light-heartedly entertaining as watching a man rape a woman in a chicken yard." -- Dark Cheetah
Michrome
Head cheese








Since: 2.1.03

Since last post: 3798 days
Last activity: 2864 days
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
If the dems aren't careful, this could be Nixon-Mcgovern II.
vsp
Andouille








Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 2999 days
Last activity: 212 days
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00

    Originally posted by Michrome
    If the dems aren't careful, this could be Nixon-Mcgovern II.


As long as it leads to Watergate II and Bush resigning the Presidency like Nixon did, that's more tempting than you'd think.

(not that resigning in favor of CHENEY is a positive thing...)




"When WCW tries to be racy, it's generally about as light-heartedly entertaining as watching a man rape a woman in a chicken yard." -- Dark Cheetah
redsoxnation
Scrapple








Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 444 days
Last activity: 444 days
#7 Posted on
A recent reminder about New Hampshire: Clinton lost New Hampshire in '92, only to win the Presidency. Dole lost New Hampshire in '96, only to win the nomination. Gore carried New Hampshire in the primary, while Bush lost New Hampshire in the primary. Bush then won the General election in New Hampshire in '00.
So, the past 3 Presidential elections are an indication that New Hampshire is no longer an indicator regarding the nomination/general election.



Ok, so Ted Williams is decapitated now? What will his son do next, sell him to the Japanese dog food company that bought former Kentucky Derby winner Ferdinand?
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1235 days
Last activity: 1031 days
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
The other thing being that the contested Democratic primary seasons recently have been situations where the front-runner was not the winner and the winner came from back in the back. 1984, 1996, and 2000 are the exceptions to that rule. Examples:

1992
Early frontrunner: Mario Cuomo
Winner: Bubba

1989
EF: Gary Hart
Winner: Mike Dukakis

1980
EF: Capt. Chappaquiddick
Winner: Carter

1976
EF: Fred Harris/Mo Udall(there really wasn't one)
Winner: Carter

1972
EF: Ed Muskie
Winner: George McGovern

1968
EF: LBJ, then RFK
Winner: HHH




"Each time I've met Huffington, I wondered if she was not somehow the long-lost daughter of Madame Nicolai Ceaucescu, or a genetic cross between Martha Stewart and Count Dracula. Had this Greek-born harpy lived in medieval times, she would have been sewn up in a bag with a rooster and two snakes and thrown into the nearest river."
-- Eric Margolis, Toronto Star
vsp
Andouille








Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 2999 days
Last activity: 212 days
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
    Originally posted by redsoxnation
    A recent reminder about New Hampshire: Clinton lost New Hampshire in '92, only to win the Presidency. Dole lost New Hampshire in '96, only to win the nomination. Gore carried New Hampshire in the primary, while Bush lost New Hampshire in the primary. Bush then won the General election in New Hampshire in '00.
    So, the past 3 Presidential elections are an indication that New Hampshire is no longer an indicator regarding the nomination/general election.



In terms of the Democratic nomination (which is what was being discussed):

* Clinton's '92 general election win was at least in part due to Perot running interference. He did come in a strong second (25% to New Englander Tsongas's 33%) in NH in '92, despite the "bimbo eruption" publicity going around.

* Dole isn't a Democrat.

* Gore won both New Hampshire and the nomination. Whether he won the general election or not is NOT NOT NOT NOT something I will debate in this thread.

For either Dean or Kerry to lose in New Hampshire, which is pretty close to a "native son" state for either of them, would be a serious setback. It would be like Gephardt losing in Iowa. Gephardt and Lieberman don't have as high expectations in NH -- Lieberman may be from nearby Massachusetts, but he's running as anything BUT a typical northeastern liberal.

In terms of the general election, I think we'll all agree that "who won New Hampshire" will be a distant afterthought once the conventions are over and the real campaigns begin.


(edited by vsp on 27.8.03 1204)


"When WCW tries to be racy, it's generally about as light-heartedly entertaining as watching a man rape a woman in a chicken yard." -- Dark Cheetah
redsoxnation
Scrapple








Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 444 days
Last activity: 444 days
#10 Posted on
    Originally posted by vsp
    Gore won both New Hampshire and the nomination. Whether he won the general election or not is NOT NOT NOT NOT something I will debate in this thread.

On that item, I was talking about Bush losing his own primary in New Hampshire winning New Hampshire in the general election over Gore who won the primary in New Hampshire.
As for the other two examples, it does show a trend that in the past 3 Presidential Primaries, the party not in power has seen the winner of the New Hampshire primary not get their party's nomination. Even back in '92 with Clinton, California was still a June primary, where as now its in the March calendar season. The smart candidates should actually be putting their attention on New York, California, Texas, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Florida and their delegates for the convention. And remember, Gephardt does hold one additional edge in the Congressional 'wild card' delegates that he has a lot of deals cut for.

(edited by redsoxnation on 27.8.03 1514)

(edited by CRZ on 27.8.03 1245)

Ok, so Ted Williams is decapitated now? What will his son do next, sell him to the Japanese dog food company that bought former Kentucky Derby winner Ferdinand?
Big Bad
Scrapple








Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario

Since last post: 7 hours
Last activity: 7 hours
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.54


    1968
    EF: LBJ, then RFK
    Winner: HHH



Gee, a guy named HHH going over a popular young guy. History repeats itself.




"When this bogus term alternative rock was being thrown at every '70s retro rehash folk group, we were challenging people to new sonic ideas. If some little snotty anarchist with an Apple Mac and an attitude thinks he invented dance music and the big rock group is coming into his territory, [that's] ridiculous." - Bono, 1997
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 30 days
Last activity: 20 hours
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.28
1992
Early frontrunner: Mario Cuomo
Winner: Bubba


Cuomo never even formed an exploritory committee. Bubba was the front runner from the start.

1989
EF: Gary Hart
Winner: Mike Dukakis


Only because Hart self-destructed. Again, Dukakis was the front-runner for almost all the primary.

1980
EF: Capt. Chappaquiddick
Winner: Carter


You cannot call a sitting President anything other than a front-runner in their primary.

1976
EF: Fred Harris/Mo Udall(there really wasn't one)
Winner: Carter


That was a jam-packed year. My parents have a copy of the front page of the Lexington paper with Mo Udall kissing baby MoeGates.

1972
EF: Ed Muskie
Winner: George McGovern


This is the only one you can really call a surging come-from-behind victory.

1968
EF: LBJ, then RFK
Winner: HHH


HHH was by far the front runner when LBJ quit. Kennedy was the surging come-from-behind guy, and remember he took quite a while to get in the race.



"I'm sorry, I didn't think I was going to talk about 'man on dog' with a United States Senator. It's sort of freaking me out."


Associated Press interview with Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), 04-07-2003.
Pages: 1Thread ahead: CA GCOTD (offline): MAILANDER
Next thread: No 10 knew: Iraq no threat
Previous thread: Ridiculous gas prices: Who to blame?
(1862 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
It was a joke, was just wondering what the reaction would be :P
The W - Current Events & Politics - New Hampshire: Dean's to Lose?Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.125 seconds.