Now, here's a headline that will ruin DubYah's day ! Anyone see the earthquake register, for the White House and LaFayette Park, this morning ?
The thing to read in this article, are the "excuses", made mid-way, by the writer of this article, explaining to us MORONS, how such a HORRIBLE thing could happen, like this ! It's a HOOT ! Oh, the tangled web, we weave !
Courtesy of yahoonews.com...
Clark Tied With President Bush in Poll
Mon Sep 22, 4:18 PM ET
By WILL LESTER, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Democrat Wesley Clark, in the presidential race for less than a week, is tied with President Bush (news - web sites) in a head-to-head matchup, according to a poll that shows several Democratic candidates strongly challenging the Republican incumbent.
Clark, a retired Army general, garnered 49 percent support to Bush's 46 percent, which is essentially a tie given the poll's margin of error. The CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll was conducted Sept. 19-21, beginning two days after Clark announced he would become the 10th Democratic candidate for the party's nomination.
Several other Democrats who have been in the race for months also were close to Bush in direct matchups. Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites) of Massachusetts and Sen. Joe Lieberman (news - web sites) of Connecticut also were tied with the president, while Bush held a slight lead over former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean (news - web sites) and Rep. Dick Gephardt (news - web sites) of Missouri.
In the head-to-head confrontations, it was Kerry at 48 percent to Bush's 47 percent; and Bush's 48 percent to Lieberman's 47 percent. Bush held a slight lead over Dean, 49-45 percent, and had a similar advantage over Gephardt.
Separately, Clark led all Democratic candidates in the survey released Monday that showed Bush far more vulnerable.
The president's job approval was 50 percent, with 47 percent disapproving. The public gave Bush high marks for having the personality and leadership qualities of a chief executive. But just over half, 51 percent, said they disagreed with the president on issues that matter most to them, while 46 percent agree.
Republican pollster Bill McInturff cautioned against making too much of Clark's early strength in a national poll taken so close to his well-publicized entry into the presidential race.
"There are plenty of examples where you get this enormous bounce and it usually settles quickly," said McInturff, citing Republican Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record)'s showing in a South Carolina poll taken after his victory in the 2000 New Hampshire primary in 2000.
Public opinion is extremely unpredictable early in the election cycle as voters have not focused on the race, according to McInturff, who noted that Republican Bob Dole was running ahead of President Clinton (news - web sites) the year before the election. Clinton prevailed in 1996.
Still, Clark's strong showing in early polls — a Newsweek survey this past weekend showed Clark grouped among the leaders in the Democratic field and not far behind Bush in a head-to-head matchup — will impress Democratic donors, said Dane Strother, a Democratic strategist not aligned with any of the campaigns.
"If you're number one in the polls, I don't care when it happens," said Strother, who pointed out that Democratic activists also will be closely watching Clark, and "you only get one chance to make a good first impression."
The battle for the party nomination will be fought state by state, and Clark's strength in early-voting states such as Iowa and New Hampshire will be crucial. National polls tend to reflect name recognition and aren't the most accurate indicator of a candidate's viability.
Among voters who are Democratic or lean Democratic, Clark led all Democratic candidates with 22 percent, Dean had 13 percent, Kerry and Gephardt 11 percent and Lieberman 10 percent. The remaining candidates were in the low single digits.
The poll of 1,003 adults, including 877 registered voters, had a margin of error of plus of minus 3 percentage points, 4 points for registered voters.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2& ... &printer=1
Clark Tied With President Bush in Poll
-
mikenycLI
- Posts: 526
- Joined: Mon May 26, 2003 2:02 pm
- Location: New York City Metropolitan Area, United States
Here's an intertesting, Clinton insider's take, on the Clark anomoly, especially his thoughts on the Clinton Motives....
Courtesy of nypost.com...
WHY CLARK WILL FADE
By DICK MORRIS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email Archives
Print Reprint
September 23, 2003 -- THE shocking truth about the U.S. presidential race is that the sudden and headlong collapse of President Bush's popularity has created such a vacuum that a new candidate such as retired Gen. Wesley Clark has no difficulty soaring to the top of the polls based on one week's publicity.
The most recent Newsweek survey documents both Bush's crash and Clark's rise. Bush is now down to a job-approval rating of only 51 percent. More ominously for the Republicans, in a trial heat against any Democrat (except Howard Dean), he scores below the crucial 50 percent mark. Against Al Gore and John Kerry, he gets only 48 percent, and against Clark, drops to 47 percent. When an incumbent president is below 50 percent of the vote, he is in desperate trouble. (Bush still manages 52 percent against Dean.)
Asked if Bush should be re-elected, Americans vote no by 50-44.
Equally astonishing is the sudden rise of Gen. Clark. After only a week as the media's darling, he leads the Democratic pack with 14 percent of the vote to Dean's and Joseph Lieberman's 12 percent, with Kerry at 10 percent and Dick Gephardt at 8 percent.
The key to Bush's free-fall? Only 46 percent approve of his handling of postwar Iraq, down 5 points from his ratings last week. Not only do Americans mind losing soldiers, they also worry about the cost of the occupation, with 56 percent complaining that it is too high.
Clark's rise is clearly a media-inspired flavor of the week. When Dean graced the front pages of Time and Newsweek, he was similarly honored with a first-place rating. Clark's surge is not so much a testament to his strength as to the weakness of Bush on the one hand and the Democratic field on the other.
Clark will not wear well. His early gaffes show his inexperience. He would be a bit like a latter-day Dwight D. Eisenhower, except that nobody can quite recall what war it is that he won. The initial enthusiasm for his candidacy really came from Europe, where this general-who-opposes-war is the kind of guy only the elites of Paris can truly love. The only primary he has locked up is Democrats abroad.
But then Bill Clinton picked up the Clark banner and had his staff rally around his fellow Arkansan. Why? Hillary and Bill support confusion, chaos and consternation as their preferred strategy for Democrats in 2004. Determined that nobody but they capture the White House - or even the Democratic Party - the Clintons are opposed to anyone who gains momentum.
In the 18th and 19th centuries, Britain pursued a policy of opposing any European nation that got too powerful, always amassing a coalition behind the weaker states to maintain the balance of power. This is precisely the Clinton posture in this election year.
In the long run, Dean's momentum will prove real and Clark's will be seen as bogus. Dean has amassed a base of grassroots (or cyber-roots) support by tapping into two groups - gays and peaceniks. His message spread among them not as a result of top-down advertising but by the new Internet style of viral, horizontal marketing. Gays and their supporters and anti-war zealots spread the word among themselves that Dean was their man.
The result was a genuine outpouring of backing from small donors and local activists.
The Dean candidacy is the first creation of the Internet age. By contrast, Clark's is perhaps the last of the media-created candidacies. Dean's support will carry him through the early primaries. He will likely score one-punch knockouts in Iowa of Gephardt, in New Hampshire of Kerry, and in South Carolina of Edwards. His three victims must win their respective primaries because they come from the state next door. Their failure to do so means the end of their candidacies.
Dean still can't beat Bush. But how far can Bush drop before we hear the splash at the bottom of the well?
http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedc ... s/3151.htm
Courtesy of nypost.com...
WHY CLARK WILL FADE
By DICK MORRIS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email Archives
Print Reprint
September 23, 2003 -- THE shocking truth about the U.S. presidential race is that the sudden and headlong collapse of President Bush's popularity has created such a vacuum that a new candidate such as retired Gen. Wesley Clark has no difficulty soaring to the top of the polls based on one week's publicity.
The most recent Newsweek survey documents both Bush's crash and Clark's rise. Bush is now down to a job-approval rating of only 51 percent. More ominously for the Republicans, in a trial heat against any Democrat (except Howard Dean), he scores below the crucial 50 percent mark. Against Al Gore and John Kerry, he gets only 48 percent, and against Clark, drops to 47 percent. When an incumbent president is below 50 percent of the vote, he is in desperate trouble. (Bush still manages 52 percent against Dean.)
Asked if Bush should be re-elected, Americans vote no by 50-44.
Equally astonishing is the sudden rise of Gen. Clark. After only a week as the media's darling, he leads the Democratic pack with 14 percent of the vote to Dean's and Joseph Lieberman's 12 percent, with Kerry at 10 percent and Dick Gephardt at 8 percent.
The key to Bush's free-fall? Only 46 percent approve of his handling of postwar Iraq, down 5 points from his ratings last week. Not only do Americans mind losing soldiers, they also worry about the cost of the occupation, with 56 percent complaining that it is too high.
Clark's rise is clearly a media-inspired flavor of the week. When Dean graced the front pages of Time and Newsweek, he was similarly honored with a first-place rating. Clark's surge is not so much a testament to his strength as to the weakness of Bush on the one hand and the Democratic field on the other.
Clark will not wear well. His early gaffes show his inexperience. He would be a bit like a latter-day Dwight D. Eisenhower, except that nobody can quite recall what war it is that he won. The initial enthusiasm for his candidacy really came from Europe, where this general-who-opposes-war is the kind of guy only the elites of Paris can truly love. The only primary he has locked up is Democrats abroad.
But then Bill Clinton picked up the Clark banner and had his staff rally around his fellow Arkansan. Why? Hillary and Bill support confusion, chaos and consternation as their preferred strategy for Democrats in 2004. Determined that nobody but they capture the White House - or even the Democratic Party - the Clintons are opposed to anyone who gains momentum.
In the 18th and 19th centuries, Britain pursued a policy of opposing any European nation that got too powerful, always amassing a coalition behind the weaker states to maintain the balance of power. This is precisely the Clinton posture in this election year.
In the long run, Dean's momentum will prove real and Clark's will be seen as bogus. Dean has amassed a base of grassroots (or cyber-roots) support by tapping into two groups - gays and peaceniks. His message spread among them not as a result of top-down advertising but by the new Internet style of viral, horizontal marketing. Gays and their supporters and anti-war zealots spread the word among themselves that Dean was their man.
The result was a genuine outpouring of backing from small donors and local activists.
The Dean candidacy is the first creation of the Internet age. By contrast, Clark's is perhaps the last of the media-created candidacies. Dean's support will carry him through the early primaries. He will likely score one-punch knockouts in Iowa of Gephardt, in New Hampshire of Kerry, and in South Carolina of Edwards. His three victims must win their respective primaries because they come from the state next door. Their failure to do so means the end of their candidacies.
Dean still can't beat Bush. But how far can Bush drop before we hear the splash at the bottom of the well?
http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedc ... s/3151.htm